AUTAUQUA  LITERARY 

and 

CIENTIFIC 


Lfornia 
>nal 

ty 


LIBRARY 


SAN  DIEGO 


THE 


STRENGTH    AND    WEAKNESS 


SOCIALISM 


BY 


RICHARD    T.    ELY,    PH.D.,  LL.D. 

Professor  of  Political  Economy  and  Director  of  the  School  of 

Economics,  Political    Science,  and   History  in 

the  University  of  Wisconsin 


NEW  YORK  CLEVELAND 

Cfje   (Efjautauqua 


CHICAGO 


Copyright  1894  an<^  '^99 
BY  THOMAS  Y.  CROWELL.  &  COMPANY 


PEEFACE. 


DR.  RUDOLF  MEYER,  a  conservative  German  author, 
published  a  work  some  twenty  years  ago  entitled  "  The 
Struggle  of  the  Fourth  Estate  for  Emancipation."  By 
the  "  Fourth  Estate  "  he  of  course  meant  the  wage-earn- 
ing classes.  At  that  time  Dr.  Meyer  entertained  the 
hope  that  the  acceptance  of  a  program  of  social  re- 
form would  be  sufficient  to  save  Germany  from  social 
democracy.  Germany,  however,  was  not  ready  to  go  so 
far  as  Dr.  Meyer  recommended,  and  the  growth  of  social 
democracy  was  in  no  wise  impeded.  Germany  has  done 
much  to  improve  the  conditions  of  the  masses,  but  she 
has  always  moved  so  late  that  the  masses  have  received 
the  impression  that  the  action  was  forced  by  fear,  and 
did  not  proceed  from  a  real,  sincere  desire  to  benefit  the 
less  fortunate  portions  of  the  community,  especially  the 
wage-earning  population.  Dr.  Meyer  has  just  published 
another  book,  entitled  "  Capitalism,  Jin  de  siecle."  Dr. 
Meyer  maintains  that  it  is  now  too  late  for  Germany 

to  adopt  the  program  of  reform  which  he  urged  twenty 

v 


VI  PREFACE. 

years  ago;  and  he  considers  it  essential  that  the  public 
authorities  should  come  to  at  least  a  temporary  agree- 
ment with  social  democracy,  and  thus  work  together  for 
the  salvation  of  Germany  from  impending  perils.  He 
apprehends  that  Germany  must  make  a  choice  between 
state  socialism  and  social  democracy,  and  he  fears  that 
social  democracy  may  carry  the  day. 

The  United  States  has  now  the  opportunity  which 
Germany  had  twenty  years  ago.  It  is  not  by  any  means 
too  late  for  us  to  escape  the  situation  in  which  Germany 
finds  herself.  However  it  may  be  in  Germany,  the  policy 
of  social  reform  is  still  practicable  among  us;  but  we 
must  always  bear 'in  mind  the  high  ideals  which  social- 
ism has  placed  before  the  masses  of  the  people,  and 
which  they  have  absorbed.  Timid,  half-way  measures 
will  not  stem  the  tide  of  socialism. 

What  are  the  prospects  of  this  reform  which  can  give 
us  the  benefits  of  peaceful  and  uninterrupted  progress  ? 
It  is  not  altogether  easy  —  in  fact,  it  is  always  difficult  — 
to  forecast  the  future.  There  is  probably  no  country  in 
which  more  violent,  bitter,  and  even  unprincipled  ex- 
tremes may  be  found.  We  haVe,  on  the  one  hand,  the 
anarchists  of  the  poor,  who  aim  to  arouse  bitterness  and 
hatred,  and  who  shrink  from  no  exercise  of  force,  pro- 
vided they  think  that  thereby  they  can  accomplish  their 


PREFA  CE.  vn 

ends.     With  them,  the  torch  and  the  dynamite  bomb  are  v 
questions  of  expediency. 

We  have,  on  the  other  hand,  a  class  of  men  who  advo- 
cate the  claims  of  wealth  in  precisely  the  same  spirit. 
Every  proposal  of  reform  is  greeted  by  them  with  ridi- 
cule and  misrepresentation ;  every  advocate  of  changes,  ~ 
even  in  accordance  with  constitutional  and  legal  means, 
is  villified.  These  fanatics  have  precisely  the  same  spirit 

which  animates  the  anarchists.     They  would  not  hesitate 

/ 
to  use  force  to  maintain  existing  privileges,  and  they 

would  rejoice  to  see  anything  like  a  socialistic  recon- 
struction of  society  prevented,  by  torturing  and  putting 
to  violent  death  the  advocates  of  socialism.  It  is  the 
old  spirit  which  has  ever  greeted  the  reformer  who  has 
advocated  changes  in  behalf  of  the  masses  with  the  cry, 
'.'  Crucify  him  !  crucify  him ! "  Most  fortunately,  there 
is,  between  these  two  extreme  factions,  each  of  them 
apparently  quite  small,  a  large  class  of  fair-minded,  well- 
meaning  men  and  women,  who  are  the  hope  of  the 
country.  America  has  been  called  the  land  of  the 
"  almighty  dollar,"  and  it  has  been  supposed  to  be  dom- 
inated exclusively  by  a  narrow  mercantilism  ;  yet  one 
frequently  meets,  among  the  business  leaders  of  the 
country,  with  a  certain  broad-mindedness  which  is  as 
delightful  as  it  is  reassuring.  Men  of  this  class  are  men 


viii  PREFA  CE. 

who  wijtl  favor  mutual  concessions  and  a  conciliatory 
policy. 

This  book  has  been  written  in  a  conservative  spirit.  It 
cannot  be  understood  unless  the  reader  bears  in  mind  that 
its  standpoint  is  that  of  conservatism.  The  peaceful 
progress  of  society,  with  the  conservation  of  the  results 
of  past  historical  development,  is  the  aufehor's  desire.  He 
will  not,  however,  be  surprised  to  have  the  charge  of  rad- 
cialism  brought  against  him.  We  have  among  us  a  class 
of  mammon  worshippers,  whose  one  test  of  conservatism, 
or  radicalism,  is  the  attitude  which  one  takes  with  re- 
spect to  accumulated  wealth.  Whatever  tends  to  the 
preservation  of  the  wealth  of  the  wealthy  is  called  con- 
servatism, and  whatever  favors  anything  else,  no  matter 
what,  they  call  socialism.  A  writer's  whole  nature  may 
be  that  of  a  conservative ;  he  may  love  the  old  ways ;  he 
may  to  some  extent  draw  his  social  ideals  from  a  past 
which  he  considers,  with  respect  to  its  feeling  about 
wealth,  saner  than  the  present  age,  and  yet,  because  he 
would,  by  social  action,  endeavor  to  change  certain  ten- 
dencies, and  to  conserve  the  treasures  of  the  past  which 
he  feels  threatened  by  new  and  startling  forces,  he  is 
still  a  radical  in  the  eyes  of  those  men  whose  one  and 
sole  test  is  money. 

The  socialist,  as  well  as  the  non-socialist  reader  of  this 


PREFACE.  IX 

book,  must  clearly  understand  that  the  socialism  which 
is  described  in  its  pages  is  not  that  of  any  one  school. 
Many  a  socialist  will  take  up  this  book  and  find  missing 
in  it  that  which  he  considers  essential.  What  the  author 
tries  to  do,  however,  is  to  give  wkat  seems  to  him  the 
true  essence  of  socialism  as  an  industrial  system.  He 
has  studied  carefully  the  writings  of  various  socialists, 
and  has  stripped  off  from  socialism;  as  frequently  pre- 
sented, those  accessories  which  it  seems  to  him  are  no 
part  of  it.  He  has  given  that  presentation  of  socialism 
which  seems  to  him  to  contain  the  greatest  strength. 

The  author  desires  to  express  his  gratitude  to  many 
persons  who  have  most  kindly  given  him  assistance  of 
one  kind  and  another.  Valuable  suggestions  and  im- 
portant material  have  been  sent  him  from  different 
countries,  and  personal  friends  have  read  the  proofs. 
Particular  acknowledgment  must  be  made  to  the  fol- 
lowing :  Prof.  William  A.  Scott,  the  author's  colleague  in 
the  University  of  Wisconsin ;  Mr.  Charles  Zeublin,  of  the 
University  of  Chicago ;  Prof.  John  R.  Commons,  of  the 
University  of  Indiana ;  Sidney  Webb,  Esq.,  and  Edward 
R.  Pease,  Esq.,  of  the  Fabian  Society ;  H.  W.  Lee,  Esq., 
secretary  of  the  Social  Democratic  Federation  of  Eng- 
land ;  Geoffrey  Drage,  Esq.,  of  London,  secretary  of  the 
Royal  Commission  on  Labor ;  Dr.  Heinrich  Braun,  of 


X  PREFA  CE. 

Berlin,  Editor  of  the  Archiv  fur  sociale  Gesetzgebung  und 
Statistik  ;  Professor  Raphael-Georges  Levy,  Baron  Pierre 
de  Coubertin,  and  Theodore  Marburg,  Esq.,  all  of  Paris  ; 
Prof.  Charles  Gide,  of  Montpellier,  France ;  Dr.  Daniel 
De  Leon,  and  Lucien  Sanial,  Esq.,  of  New  York ;  Sylves- 
ter Baxter,  Esq.,  of  Boston;  A.  G.  Fradenburg,  Esq., 
A.  M.  Simons,  Esq.,  and  Paul  Tyner,  Esq.,  all  advanced 
students  of  the  author's  classes  in  the  University  of 
Wisconsin. 

The  author  must  make  special  mention  of  two 
friends  who  have  given  him  assistance,  unusual  both 
with  respect  to  quantity  and  quality.  These  are  Prof. 
David  Kinley,  of  the  University  of  Illinois,  who  has 
read  the  manuscript  and  proofs  with  great  care,  and 
made  many  helpful  suggestions,  and  Mrs.  Helen  Frances 
Bates,  a  graduate  student  of  the  University  of  Wiscon- 
sin, who  has  rendered  him  efficient  assistance,  particu- 
larly in  the  preparation  of  the  bibliography. 

UNIVERSITY  OF  WISCONSIN,  MADISON,  Wis. 
April  25,  1894. 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 


PAGE 

PREFACE v 

PART    I. — -THE   NATURE    OF    SOCIALISM. 

CHAPTER 

I.   Socialism  in  a  more   General   Sense  Distinguished 

from  Socialism  in  a  Narrower  Sense 3 

II.    The  Elements  of  Socialism 9 

III.  Definitions  of  Socialism 19 

IV.  The  Socialistic  State 29 

V    Some  Misapprehensions   Concerning  the  Nature  of 

Socialism 37 

VI.   The  Origin  of  Socialism 50 

VII.    The  Progress  of  Socialism 56 

VIII.   The  Evidences  of  an  Alleged  Irresistible  Current  of 

Socialism 73 

IX.   Socialism  Contrasted  with  other  Schemes  of  Indus- 
trial Change 85 

X.    The  Literature  of  Socialism 96 

PART    II. THE    STRENGTH    OF    SOCIALISM. 

CHAPTER 

I.   Introductory  Remarks 113 

II.   The  Strength  of  Socialism  as  a  Scheme  of  Production     116 

III.  The  Strength  of  Socialism  as  a  Scheme  for  the  Dis- 

tribution and  Consumption  of  Wealth 138 

IV.  The  Moral  Strength  of  Socialism 145 

V.   Socialism  as  a  Promoter  of  Art 157 

VI.   Socialism  and  Present  Problems 162 

VII.   Services  which  the  Agitation  of  Socialism  has  Ren- 
dered     166 

xi 


Xll  TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 


PART    III. THE    WEAKNESS    OF    SOCIALISM. 

CHAPTER  PAGE 

I.   Introductory 175 

II.    Alleged,  but  not  Valid,  Objections  to  Socialism       .     .  181 

III.  Socialism  too  Optimistic  with  Respect  to  the  Future, 

and  too  Pessimistic  with  Respect  to  the  Present  .     .  188 

IV.  The  Danger  of  the  Domination  of  a  Single  Industrial 

Principle,  and  of  the  Inevitable  Concentration  of 

Dissatisfaction  under  Socialism 197 

V.    Socialism  a  Menace  to  Liberty 206 

VI.    Objections  to  Socialism  as  a  Scheme  of  Production      .  215 
VII.    Objections  to  Socialism  as  a  Scheme  of  Distribution 

and  of  Consumption 233 

VIII.    Other  Objections  to  Socialism 244 


APPENDIX. 

Suggestions  for  Social  Reform .     .     253 


PART    I. 

THE  NATURE   OF  SOCIALISM. 


SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  KEFORM. 


CHAPTER  I. 

SOCIALISM  IN  A  MORE  GENERAL  SENSE  DISTINGUISHED 
FROM  SOCIALISM  IN  A  NARROWER  SENSE. 

THE  word  socialism,  which  has  come  into  use  in  the 
present .  century,  has  already  acquired  a  variety  of  mean- 
ings. It  seems  necessary  to  any  clear  thought  that  we 
should,  first  of  all,  distinguish  between  socialism  in  a 
large  but  not  altogether  vague  sense,  and  socialism  in 
a  more  technical  and  more  precise  sense.  Socialism  in 
this  large  sense  frequently  has  reference,  in  a  general  way, 
to  the  views  and  aspirations  of  those  who  hold  that  the 
individual  should  subordinate  himself  to  society,  main- 
taining that  thus  alone  can  the  welfare  of  all  be  secured. 
Socialism  in  this  more  general  sense  implies  the  rejec- 
tion of  the  doctrine  of  selfishness  as  a  sufficient  social  force 
arid  the  affirmation  of  altruism  as  a  principle  of  social 
action.  Socialism,  in  this  broad  sense  of  the  word,  means 
that  society  is  not  a  mere  aggregation  of  individuals,  but  a 
living,  growing  organism,  the  laws  of  which  are  something 
different  from  the  laws  of  individual  action.  Aristotle 
was  a  socialist  in  this  sense  of  the  word,  which,  it  may  be 
remarked,  is  a  true  sense  of  the  word ;  for  he  maintained 
that  you  never  could  arrive  at  the  whole  by  a  mere  addi- 
tion of  the  units  comprising  it,  and  consequently  that  the 
welfare  of  society  could  not  be  secured  through  exclusive 

3 


4  SOCIALISM  AND   SOCIAL   REFORM. 

attention  to  individual  claims.  The  prosperity  of  the 
whole,  however,  he  maintained,  implied  the  prosperity  of 
all  the  individuals  which  it  includes.  In  other  words, 
this  sage  of  antiquity  thought  we  must  proceed  in  our 
treatment  of  social  questions  from  the  standpoint  of 
society,  and  not  from  that  of  the  individual. 

"  The  state  is,  by  nature,"  says  Aristotle,1  "  clearly  prior  to  the 
individual  and  to  the  family,  since  the  whole  is  of  necessity  prior 
to  the  part.  .  .  .  The  proof  that  the  state  is  a  creation  of  nature, 
and  prior  to  the  individual,  is  that  the  individual,  when  isolated, 
is  not  self-sufficing  ;  and  therefore  he  is  like  a  part  in  relation  to 
the  whole.  But  he  who  is  unable  to  live  in  society,  or  who  has 
no  need  because  he  is  sufficient  for  himself,  must  be  either  a  beast 
or  a  god." 

The  great  thinkers  in  economics  and  politics  in  all  ages 
have  been  socialists  in  this  general  sense  of  the  word,  and 
opposed  to  them  has  been  a  small  sect  of  individualists, 
who  reject  the  conception  of  the  state  as  an  organism,  and 
believe  that  the  standpoint  of  the  individual  is  sufficient, 
both  in  science  and  in  practice.  Two  definitions  of  social- 
ism, as  here  understood,  may  be  helpful  to  the  reader. 
The  first  is  taken  from  an  address  on  Socialism  by  Dr. 
Westcott,  the  present  bishop  of  Durham.  It  is  used  to 
describe,  as  the  author  says,  not  merely  a  theory  of  eco- 
nomics, but  a  theory  of  life,  and  is  given  in  the  following 
words :  — 

"  Individualism  regards  humanity  as  made  up  of  disconnected 
or  warring  atoms.  Socialism  regards  it  as  an  organic  whole.  .  .  . 
The  aim  of  socialism  is  the  fulfilment  of  service  ;  the  aim  of  indk 
vidualism  is  the  attainment  of  some  personal  advantage  —  riches, 
place,  or  fame.  Socialism  seeks  such  an  organization  of  life  as 
shall  secure  for  every  one  the  most  complete  development  of  hie 

1  Aristotle's  Politics,  Book  I.,  2,  §§  12-14. 


SOCIALISM  IN  A  MORE  GENERAL   SENSE.         5 

powers  ;  individualism  seeks  primarily  the  satisfaction  of  the  par- 
ticular wants  of  each  one,  in  the  hope  that  the  pursuit  of  private 
interests  will,  in  the  end,  secure  public  welfare." 

And  further  on  in  the  same  address  Dr.  Westcott  asserts 
that  "the  goal  of  human  endeavor  is  the  common  well- 
being  of  all  alike,  sought  through  conditions  which  pro- 
vide for  the  fullest  culture  of  each  man  as  opposed  to  the 
special  development  of  a  race  or  a  class,  by  the  sacrifice 
of  others  in  slavery  or  serfdom,  or  necessary  subjection ; " 
and  he  speaks  of  this  as  the  central  idea  of  socialism. 
He  maintains,  however,  that  "  it  does  not  follow  that  the 
end  can  be  reached  only  in  one  way." 

Socialism  is  then  not  restricted  necessarily  to  state 
activity,  but  it  becomes  equivalent  to  affectionate  regard 
for  others  in  society,  and  the  systematic  attempt  to  im- 
prove others.  It  is  used  as  the  opposite  of  individualism, 
which  then  means  a  selfish  and  inconsiderate  exaltation 
of  the  individual. 

The  second  definition  of  socialism  to  which  reference 
is  made,  is  that  given  by  Prof.  Adolph  Wagner,  the  cele- 
brated professor  of  political  economy  in  the  University 
of  Berlin.  Defining  socialism  in  a  more  general  sense 
as  the  opposite  of  individualism,  he  says  :  — 

"  It  is,  therefore,  a  principle  which  regulates  social  and  economic 
life  according  to  the  needs  of  society  as  a  whole,  or  which  makes 
provision  for  the  satisfaction  of  those  needs,  whereas,  individual- 
ism is  a  principle  which,  in  social  and  economic  life,  places  the 
individual  in  the  foreground,  takes  the  individual  as  a  starting- 
point,  and  makes  his  interests  and  wishes  the  rule  for  society." 

The  use  of  the  word  socialism  in  the  large  sense  just 
described  is  a  legitimate  one,  for  it  serves  to  designate  a 
class  of  thinkers,  and  to  distinguish  them  from  those 


6  SOCIALISM  AND   SOCIAL  REFORM. 

who  hold  very  different  views.  Socialism  and  individ- 
ualism are  two  different  philosophical  systems.  The 
only  objection  to  the  use  of  the  word  socialism  to  des- , 
ignate  that  social  philosophy  which  is  contrasted  with 
individualism  in  the  broadest  sense,  is  that  socialism  has 
a  narrower  meaning,  to  be  described  presently,  which  has 
become  prevalent.  Thus,  if  a  writer  declares,  "I  am  a 
socialist ! "  he  is  more  likely  to  be  classed  with  Karl 
Marx  than  with  Aristotle. 

The  word  socialism  has,  however,  other  general  uses 
which  seem  to  be  altogether  wanting  in  any  scientific 
precision  of  meaning,  and  which  should  therefore  be 
rejected.  It  is  employed  to  designate  in  such  a  vague 
manner  a  tendency  or  attitude  of  mind,  that  it  lacks  all 
metes  and  bounds.  It  has,  for  example,  even  been  used 
to  designate  the  thoughts  and  efforts  of  those  who  con- 
cern themselves  with  social  affairs.  Manifestly,  in  this 
sense,  it  would  include  a  large  amount  of  the  individual- 
istic as  well  as  the  socialistic  philosophy.  One  writer1  has 
called  socialism  the  economic  philosophy  of  the  suffering 
classes.  Doubtless  he  himself  would  not  claim  for  this 
statement  the  character  of  a  scientific  definition;  for 
socialism  is  not  the  only  economic  philosophy  which  has 
been  or  may  be  embraced  by  those  spoken  of  as  the  suf- 
fering classes.  We  might  likewise  call  anarchy,  or  vol- 
untary co-operation,  or  Mr.  Henry  George's  single  tax,  the 
economic  philosophy  of  the  suffering  classes.  The  radi- 
cal improvement  of  the  lot  of  the  propertyless  majority 
has  been  declared  to  be  the  material  content  of  socialism. 
In  addition  to  the  objections  already  urged  to  the  pre- 
vious statement,  it  may  be  said  that  it  is  not  necessary 
to  view  socialism  as  a  class  problem,  although  it  must  be 
*  Dr.  von  Scheel. 


SOCIALISM  IN  A  MORE  GENERAL  SENSE.        7 

admitted  that  it  is  so  viewed  by  most  social  democrats  in 
Germany.  Socialism  may  be  advocated  by  an  artist  from 
the  artistic  standpoint,  or  by  a  theologian  from  a  religious 
standpoint.  The  true  aim  of  the  best  socialism,  it  seems 
to  the  writer,  is  that  general  social  amelioration  which 
proposes  to  sacrifice  no  class,  but  to  improve  and  elevate 
all  classes.  It  does  not  necessarily  mean  the  abolition  of 
classes,  although  under  any  system  of  socialism  other 
class  distinctions  would  prevail  than  those  which  now 
obtain. 

While, each  honest  and  careful  definition  of  socialism 
tells  us  something,  there  is  a  whole  class  of  definitions 
which  must  be  simply  rejected  as  dishonest. 

For  example,  when  one  says  that  socialism  is  that  sys- 
tem which  swallows  up  individual  liberty,  subordinating 
entirely  the  individual  to  society,  it  is  plain  that  the  so- 
called  definition  is  no  definition,  but  a  condemnation  of 
that  which  is  to  be  defined.  Then  there  are  certain  pop- 
ular and  inaccurate  ideas  which  need  not  occupy  our 
time.  There  are  those  who  call  any  general  social  up- 
heaval and  widespread  turning  things  upside  down,  social- 
ism, although  this  upheaval  manifestly  may  be  as  well 
anti-socialistic  as  socialistic.  Then  there  are  those  —  and 
we  meet  them  very  commonly  —  who  call  whatever  they 
regard  as  an  exaggeration  of  the  social  principle,  social- 
ism, especially  if  it  takes  the  form  of  state  activity. 
Thus,  whether  the  ordinary  man  calls  the  government 
ownership  and  management  of  the  telegraph  socialism  or 
not,  will  depend  upon  whether  he  approves  it  or  not. 
That  kind  of  governmental  activity  which  is  not  liked  by 
any  particular  person  is  apt  to  be  called  by  that  person 
socialism.  Manifestly  we  can  make  no  progress  in  scien- 
tific discussion  with  such  vague  and  unscientific  ideas. 


8  SOCIALISM  AND   SOCIAL  liE'ffQKM. 

The  word  socialism,  as  generally  employed,  has  a  far 
narrower  meaning  than  socialism  in  the, broad  sense  al- 
ready described.  It  calls  to  mind  an  industrial  society 
which,  in  its  main  features,  is  sufficiently  xclear  and  precise. 
It  is  not  a  theory  which  embraces  all  departments  of  social 
activity,  but  is  confined  to  the  economic  department,1 
dealing  with  others  simply  as  connected  with  this  and 
influenced  by  it.  This  socialism  is  frequently  designated 
as  "  scientific  socialism."  It  is  with  this  socialism,  which 
presents  a  theory  of  industrial  society  based  upon  radical 
social  reconstruction,  that  the  present  work  deals. 

1  Cf.  Prof.  Antou  Monger's  work,  Das  Kecht  auf  den  vollen  Ar- 
beitsertrag,  p.  2. 


TUE  ELEMENTS   OF  SOCIALISM. 


CHAPTER  II. 
THE   ELEMENTS   OF   SOCIALISM. 

SOCIALISM,  when  analyzed,  is  found  to  embrace  four 
main  elements.  The  first  of  these  is  the  common  owner- 
ship of  the  material  instruments  of  production.  It  is 
not  stated  precisely  how  this  common  ownership  is  to 
be  brought  about,  or  exactly  what  form  it  is  to  take. 
Opinions  may  and  do  differ  about  the  practical  steps 
which  are  to  be  taken  to  secure  the  desired  end,  and  also 
about  the  nature  of  the  collective  organization  in  which 
this  ownership  is  to  be  vested.  But  no  one  can  be  called 
a  socialist  in  the  modern  technical  sense  who  does  not 
accept  the  doctrine  of  the  common  ownership  of  the 
material  instruments  of  production.  The  collectivity, 
that  is,  society  as  a  whole,  is  to  take  the  place  of  indi- 
viduals and  private  associations  of  individuals  as  owners 
of  land  and  capital,  in  order  that  the  advantages  of 
ownership  may  accrue  to  the  whole,  and  not  merely  to  a 
part  of  the  whole.  The  private  receipt  of  rent  and  in- 
terest in  the  economic  sense  then  ceases,  for  rent  and 
interest  are  the  remuneration  of  ownership. 

It  is  not  difficult  to  understand  what  this  postulate  of 
socialism,  namely,  the  socialization  of  the  material  in- 
struments of  production,  means.  It  is  simply  necessary 
to  exercise  one's  imagination,  and  to  picture  to  one's  self 
the  extension  of  that  which  already  exists  in  a  compara- 
tively small  way.  The  post-office  in  the  United  States 


10  SOCIALISM  AND   SOCIAL  REFORM. 

is  already  socialized.  It  is  owned  by  the  people  as  a 
whole,  and  all  share  in  many  ways  in  the  advantages 
of  this  common  ownership.  The  telegraph  in  most 
countries  is  a  part  of  the  post-office,  and  it  is  owned  by 
the  collectivity.  Railways  in  many  countries  are  public, 
not  private  property.  Forests  are  to  a  considerable 
extent  collective  property.  All  these  kinds  of  wealth 
are  instruments  of  production ;  and  if  that  process  which 
has  made  of  these  instruments  collective  property  is 
continued  until  substantially  all  the  land  and  all  the 
capital  have  been  socialized,  we  shall  have  realized  the 
first  demand  of  socialism. 

It  is  said  substantially  all  land  and  capital,  because  it 
is  held  that  it  is  not  necessary  that  the  common  owner- 
ship should  be  absolutely  all-inclusive.  It  is  a  weakness 
of  the  extremists  to  insist  on  all  —  inclusiveness  in  com- 
mon ownership,  which  much  damages  their  cause.  What 
is  necessary  is  that  the  collective  ownership  should  be- 
come dominant  in  such  manner  as  to  control  all  other 
ownership  and  confine  it  within  narrow  limits.  All  the 
great  instruments  of  production,  like  telegraphs,  tele- 
phones, railways,  forests,  arable  lands,  and  large  manu- 
facturing plants,  must  become  collective  property;  but 
socialism  does  not  imply  that  it  is  necessary  to  restrict 
individuals  in  the  acquisition  of  the  instruments  of  pro- 
duction on  a  small  scale,  —  for  example,  a  wheelbarrow 
or  a  cart.  Socialism,  then,  presented  in  the  strongest 
form,  does  not  proceed  so  much  negatively  as  construc- 
tively. Society  is  to  acquire  the  instruments  of  pro- 
duction ;  but  individuals,  for  the  most  part,  are  not  to 
be  restrained,  except  indirectly,  by  positive  social  action. 

Emphasis  has  been  laid  by  repetition  upon  the  word 
material  as  qualification  of  the  instruments  of  produc- 


THE  ELEMENTS  OF  SOCIALISM.  11 

tion.  Tliis  means  that  man  is  excluded.  For  the  social- 
ist claims  that  under  socialism  man  will,  for  the  first 
time,  become  free.  Man  has,  in  times  past,  been  owned 
as  a  slave,  and  the  socialists  claim  that  the  wage-earner 
is  even  now  a  wage-slave,  and  their  purpose  is  to  free 
man. 

Attention  must  be  called,  also,  to  the  statement  that 
it  is  the  material  instruments  of  production  which  are  to 
be  owned  in  common,  and  not  all  wealth.  That  wealth 
which  is  not  designed  for  further  production  can  still 
remain  private  property  under  socialism.  This  means 
wealth  used  for  enjoyment  rather  than  for  production; 
for  example,  the  furniture  of  one's  house,  family  plate, 
heirlooms  of  all  sorts,  pictures,  books,  clothing,  and  many 
other  forms  of  wealth  which  can  easily  be  enumerated. 
The  ground  for  the  distinction  becomes  obvious  enough 
on  reflection.  The  design  of  socialism  is  the  abolition  of 
the  private  receipt  of  rent  and  interest.  It  desires  to 
abolish  private  property  only  in  so  far  as  it  enables  one 
to  gather  an  income  through  the  toil  of  others  without 
personal  exertions ;  for  that  the  socialists  call  levying  a 
tribute  upon  the  labor  of  others. 

The  second  element  in  socialism  is  the  common  man- 
agement of  production.  Not  only  are  the  material  in- 
struments of  production  to  be  owned  in  common,  but 
they  are  to  be  managed  by  the  collectivity,  in  order  that 
to  the  people  as  a  whole  may  accrue  all  the  benefits 
of  management;  that  is,  all  those  gains  of  enterprise 
called  profits,  as  distinguished  from  interest,  and  in 
order  that  the  management  may  be  conducted  in  accord- 
ance with  the  public  need,  rather  than  in  accordance  with 
the  advantage  of  private  captains  of  industry.  Produc- 
tion is  to  be  carried  on  to  satisfy  our  wants  for  material 


12  SOCIALISM  AND   SOCIAL  REFORM. 

tilings,  and  not  for  the  sake  of  private  profits.  The  dis- 
tinction is  undoubtedly  a  marked  one.  Production  now 
ceases  when  those  who  manage  it  are  unable  to  derive 
profits  therefrom.  This  is  a  necessity  under  modern  or 
capitalistic  production;  but  under  a  socialistic  regime, 
production  is  not  stopped  so  long  as  wants  clamor  for 
satisfaction,  and  until  all  wants  are  satisfied  there  can, 
of  course,  be  no  real  over-production.  The  distinction 
between  common  ownership  and  common  management, 
that  is,  management  by  representatives  of  the  people 
responsible  to  the  people,  is  made  clear  in  a  moment 
by  one  or  two  simple  illustrations.  Railways  have  been 
sometimes  owned  by  the  people  in  their  collective  capa- 
city, and  operated  by  a  private  company.  There  are 
those,  indeed,  who  advocate  common  ownership  of  all  the 
railways  in  the  United  States,  with  private  operation. 
Land  which  is  owned  by  the  collectivity  is  frequently 
cultivated  by  private  individuals.  What  socialism  wants, 
then,  is  not  merely  common  ownership,  but  also  a  com- 
mon or  collective  management. 

This  common  management  of  production  means  that 
the  collectivity  must  furnish  work  for  all  who  desire  it. 
As  the  socialistic  state  assumes  the  charge  of  production, 
leaving  only  very  minor  functions  to  individuals,  it  rests 
upon  it,  of  course,  to  make  the  industrial  society  all-in- 
clusive. Indeed,  the  possibility  of  socialism  once  granted, 
there  can  be  no  difficulty  about  this.  Every  one  is  nat- 
urally assigned  to  some  function  which  will  make  him 
socially  useful;  and  the  problem  of  the  unemployed  is 
inconceivable,  as  production  is  no  longer  conducted  for 
exchange,  but  for  consumption,  and  the  greater  the  pro- 
duction the  more  ample  will  be  the  means  for  the  satis- 
faction of  all  wants.  Should  it  be  possible  at  any  moment 


THE  ELEMENTS  OF  SOCIALISM.  13 

to  produce  more  than  men  really  desire  to  consume,  it 
would  merely  be  necessary  to  shorten  the  length  of  the 
working  day.  It  would  not  only  be  true,  however,  that 
all  could  find  work,  but  all  would  have  to  work,  as,  with 
common  ownership,  the  possibility  of  income  without 
personal  exertion  would  be  cut  off.  How  many  could 
find  employment  in  private  service,  it  is  not  easy  to  say. 
Under  socialism,  we  should  expect  a  social  organization 
of  medical  attendance  and  the  supply  of  medicines,  which 
would  be  simply  carrying  further  tendencies  already  at 
work  ;  and  yet  some  might  prefer  to  employ  private  phy- 
sicians. Should  the  members  of  the  socialistic  society  be 
willing  to  give  part  of  their  income  in  return  for  private 
medical  services,  there  is  no  reason  why  they  should 
be  hindered  in  so  doing.  Similarly,  religious  services 
might  be  maintained  by  private  contributions,  and  in  the 
churches  there  could  be  large  numbers  of  preachers  out- 
side of  public  employment.  Possibly,  also,  room  could 
be  found  for  remunerative  employment,  of  a  private 
character,  of  a  great  many  persons  in  the  aggregate,  who 
would  concern  themselves  with  the  smaller  branches  of 
pi-oduction.  Yet,  if  socialism  works  as  well  as  it  is 
claimed  it  will,  there  would  naturally  be  a  preference, 
altogether  apart  from  any  compulsion,  for  public  employ- 
ment. We  see  that  great  public  hospitals,  at  the  present 
time,  encroach  somewhat  on  the  individual  practice  of 
physicians,  and  that  public  schools,  in  many  places, 
drive  out  private  schools,  although  the  law  interposes 
no  obstacles  in  the  way  of  their  success. 

The  third  element  is  the  distribution  of  income  by  the 
common  authority ;  that  is,  the  income  of  society,  or  the 
national  dividend,  as  it  is  frequently  called :  and  it  is 
that  part  of  the  wealth  produced  by  society  which  may 


14  SOCIALISM  AND   SOCIAL  REFORM. 

be  used  for  enjoyment,  after  the  material  instruments  of 
production  have  been  maintained  and  suitably  improved 
and  extended.  The  common  ownership  and  management 
of  the  material  instruments  of  production  necessarily 
results  in  ownership  of  the  national  dividend  by  the  col- 
lectivity, in  the  first  instance,  just  as  now  those  who  own 
and  manage  industry  have  the  ownership  of  the  products 
of  industry,  and  from  these  products  satisfy  the  claims 
of  those  who  have  participated  in  their  production.  It 
remains  for  the  collectivity  to  distribute  all  the  wealth 
produced  for  consumption  among  all  the  members  of 
society. 

As  there  is  provision  of  work  for  all  in  the  public 
service,  so  there  must  be  provided  an  income  for  alJ. 
But 'this  provision  of  income  for  all  reaches  even  further 
than  the  ranks  of  the  toilers.  There  must  always  be  in 
society  some  who  are  physically  or  mentally  incapable 
of  toil,  and  socialism  contemplates  the  provision  of  an 
income  for  these  also.  The  idea  of  socialism  in  this 
respect  is  that  of  mutual  insurance.  We  are  all  insured 
from  our  birth  against  contingencies  incapacitating  us 
from  earning  a  livelihood;  and  provision  is  made  for  the 
satisfaction  of  our  wants,  even  if  we  cannot  render  a 
personal  return. 

We  are  now  brought  face  to  face  with  what  we  may, 
perhaps,  call  the  chief  purpose  of  socialism ;  namely,  dis- 
tributive justice.  While  socialists  have  desired  to  bring 
about  a  better  industrial  organization  to  increase  wealth, 
and  while  they  even  lay  emphasis  upon  the  vast  addi- 
tions to  the  national  dividend  which,  according  to  them, 
socialism  would  bring,  it  can  scarcely  be  too  much  to  say 
that  almost,  if  not  quite  invariably,  considerations  con- 
cerning justice  in  distribution  have  given  them  their 
initiative. 


THE  ELEMENTS   OF  SOCIALISM.  15 

Yet  what  is  justice  in  distribution  ?  While  all  agree 
that  the  present  distribution  is  unjust,  wide  differences 
of  opinion  exist  as  to  what  is,  after  all,  that  justice  in 
distribution  which  is  to  be  the  aim  of  the  new  society. 
A  learned  jurist,  and  at  the  same  time  an  avowed  social- 
ist, claims  that  the  socialistic  schemes  of  distribution 
may  be  divided  into  two  classes;  namely,  distribution 
which  aims  to  satisfy  needs,  and  distribution  which  aims 
to  accord  to  each  one  the  full  product  of  his  toil.  This 
would  hardly  seem  to  be  sufficient  to  cover  all  socialistic 
plans  of  distribution,  and  perhaps  it  is  better  to  ap- 
proach the  subject  from  a  somewhat  different  stand- 
point. We  can  distinguish  at  least  four  schemes  of 
distributive  justice.  One  is  the  distribution  which  aims 
to  secure  absolute  mechanical  equality,  that  is,  equality 
in  quantity  and  kinds  of  goods.  All  must  have  food, 
clothing,  shelter,  education,  and,  in  fact,  all  good  things, 
so  far  as  this  is  possible,  in  like  quality  and  quantity. 
If  distinctions  in  clothing  are  made  foi  age  and  sex, 
this  is  the  most  which  can  be  tolerated.1  Emphasis  is 
laid  upon  the  equality  to  be  carried  out  in  all  details 
—  equality  is  the  aim  and  end  of  this  sort  of  distribu- 
tion. A  later  idea  of  distributive  justice  is  that  which 
apportions  reward  to  merit.  It  has  been  proposed  that 
society  should  be  organized  in  hierarchical  form,  and 
that  in  this  hierarchically  organized  industrial  society 
positions  should  be  assigned  according  to  capacity,  the 
highest  positions  going  to  the  greatest  capacity ;  and 
that  reward  should  be  in  proportion  to  capacity.  There 
could  thus  be  room  for  quite  as  many  gradations  in 

1  This  was  the  view  of  Baboeuf.  See  the  author's  French  and 
German  Socialism,  where  the  other  views  of  distribution  are  also 
described. 


16  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

society  as  at  present,  but  their  basis  would  be  personal, 
and  not  inherited  rank  or  property.1  A  still  later  idea  of 
distributive  justice  is  that  which  assigns  the  product  in 
proportion  to  needs,  recognizing  the  inequality  of  needs, 
while  calling  upon  each  one  to  render  service  in^  propor- 
tion to  his  strength  of  body  and,  mind.  Double  strength, 
then,  means  double  duty,  but  no  greater  claim  on  that 
account  upon  the  national  dividend;  for  the  larger  claim 
upon  the  national  dividend  must  be  based  simply  upon 
greater  need.2  The  fourth  idea  of  distributive  justice, 
and  that  which  seems  now  to  prevail  generally  among 
the  more  active  socialists,  is  equality  of  income;  not 
a  mechanical  equality,  but  an  equality  in  value. 

Each  one,  according  to  this  idea,  is  to  receive  an  equal 
value  as  his  income ;  but  these  values  may  be  represented 
by  goods  and  services  the  most  diverse.  There  are  those 
who  claim  that  this  last  distribution  accords  both  with 
the  demand  that  distribution  shall  be  according  to  needs, 
and  that  it  should  accord  to  each  one  the  full  product 
of  his  toil.  For  they  hold  that  equal  values  will  en- 
able every  one  to  satisfy  all  rational  needs,  and  that  the 
services  of  all  who  participate  in  production,  according 
to  their  strength  have  substantially  equal  value.  But 
whatever  idea  in  regard  to  distributive  justice  is  once 
adopted,  society  is  to  carry  it  out. 

The  fourth  element  in  socialism  is  private  property  in 
the  larger  proportion  of  income.  It  thus  becomes  at 
once  apparent  that  modern  socialism  does  not  propose 
to  abolish  private  property.  Quite  the  contrary.  Social 
ism  maintains  that  private  property  is  necessary  for 
personal  freedom  and  the  full  development  of  our  facul- 

1  This  was  the  view  of  the  St.  Siraonians. 
8  Louis  Blanc's  idea  of  distributive  justice. 


THE  ELEMENTS   OF  SOCIALISM.  17 

ties.  The  advantages  of  private  property  are  claimed 
by  the  advocates  of  the  existing  social  order  as  argu- 
ments for  its  maintenance;  but  socialism  asserts  that 
society,  as  at  present  constituted,  is  unable  to  secure 
to  each  one  the  private  property  which  he  requires. 
Socialism  proposes  to  extend  the  institution  of  pri- 
vate property  in  such  manner  as  to  secure  to  each  in- 
dividual in  society  property  in  an  annual  income,  which 
shall  be,  so  far  as  practicable,  sufficient  to  satisfy  all 
rational  wants,  and  to  protect  all  from  those  attacks 
upon  personal  freedom  which  proceed  from  the  depend- 
ence of  man  upon  man.  The  instruments  of  production 
do  not  exist  for  their  own  sake,  but  for  the  sake  of 
products  for  consumption,  which  again  have  as  their 
destination  man's  needs.  Now,  while  private  property 
in  the  instruments  of  production  is  to  be  reduced  to  its 
lowest  terms,  it  is  to  be  extended  and  strengthened  in 
the  products  for  the  sake  of  which  the  instruments  exist. 
Attention  must  be  called  to  the  expression,  "  the  larger 
proportion  of  income."  Income  is  derived  from  the  use 
of  property.  Even  at  present  the  amount  of  property 
enjoyed  in  common  is  in  the  aggregate  large.  Public 
parks,  public  galleries,  public  schools,  public  highways, 
are  illustrations  which  readily  occur  to  one.  All  these 
(  institutions  yield  an  income  enjoyed  freely  by  all  in  pro- 
portion to  needs  and  capacities ;  for  income  as  just  stated 
means  use  or  enjoyment.  We  have  at  the  present  time 
in  the  United  States,  in  these  things,  something  which 
may  be  called  true  communism.  Naturally,  under  social- 
ism, as  the  thoughts  of  men  would  be  more  directed  to 
the  common  welfare,  and  the  inclination  of  men  to  enjoy 
things  in  common  would  be  greatly  strengthened,  there 
would  be  a  very  large  increase  in  the  number  of  things 


18  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL   HEFOUM. 

enjoyed  in  common,  and  thus  yielding  a  common  income. 
Public  libraries  would  unquestionably  be  greatly  in- 
creased ;  and  while  no  sane  socialist  would  propose  to 
prohibit  private  ownership  of  libraries,  a  great  increase 
in  public  libraries  might  perhaps  diminish  the  desire  to 
have  private  libraries.  Possibly  the  same  would  be  true 
with  regard  to  galleries  of  art  and  museums ;  and  it  could 
not  fail  to  be  true  with  respect  to  grounds  for  pleasure  and 
recreation.  There  would  be  thus  a  use  of  more  things 
than  at  present  in  common ;  and  thus  there  would  be  an 
absolute  increase,  and  probably  also  a  relative  increase, 
in  the  common  income,  and  private  income  would  be 
correspondingly  diminished.  There  is  a  tendency,  even 
at  the  present  time,  to  increase  very  considerably  the 
number  and  importance  of  those  things  that  are  enjoyed 
in  common ;  and  socialism  would  simply  carry  further 
this  tendency  and  accelerate  it.  Nevertheless,  the  greater 
proportion  of  the  national  dividend  would,  even  as  at 
present,  still  be  private  income. 


DEFINITIONS  OF  SOCIALISM.  19 


CHAPTER  III. 
DEFINITIONS   OF   SOCIALISM. 

IT  is  well  to  give  especial  attention  to  definitions  in 
any  subject  that  belongs  to  moral  or  political  philos- 
ophy, because  definitions  give  us  the  central  ideas  of 
their  authors.  A  few  significant  definitions  of  socialism, 
in  the  narrow  sense  with  which  this  work  is  concerned, 
will  be  given  in  the  present  chapter,  in  order,  on  the  one 
hand,  that  the  reader  may  contrast  these  definitions  with 
the  analysis  of  socialism  given  in  the  preceding  chap- 
ter ;  and  on  the  other,  that  he  may,  by  comparison,  see 
the  points  most  significant  in  the  program  of  socialism 
as  they  present  themselves  to  the  minds  of  different 
persons. 

First  of  all,  the  results  of  the  analysis  of  socialism 
may  be  brought  together  in  a  definition  which  would 
read  somewhat  as  follows  :  Socialism  is  that  contemplated 
si/stem  of  industrial  society  which  proposes  the  abolition  of 
private  property  in  the  great  material  instruments  of  pro- 
duction, and  the  substitution  therefor  of  collective  property; 
and  advocates  the  collective  management  of  production,  to- 
gether with  the  distribution  of  social  income  by  society, 
and  private  property  in  the  larger  proportion  of  this  social 
income. 

Two  of  the  most  noteworthy  writers  on  socialism 
who  are  not  themselves  socialists  are  Dr.  Schaffle,  whose 
works,  "  The  Quintessence  of  Socialism  "  and  "  The  Im- 


20  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

possibility  of  Social  Democracy,"  have  attracted  so  much 
attention,  and  Professor  Adolph  Wagner,  who  has  so 
successfully  attempted  the  utilization  of  the  results  of 
socialistic  thought,  without  the  acceptance  of  anything 
like  its  entire  program.  Both  these  writers  have  given 
definitions  of  socialism  which  well  deserve  attention. 
That  of  Dr.  Schaffle  is  given  in  a  description  of  the 
real  aim  of  socialism,  and  reads  as  follows :  — 

"  To  replace  the  system  of  private  capital  (that  is,  the  specu- 
lative method  of  production,  regulated  on  behalf  of  society  only 
by  the  free  competition  of  private  enterprises),  by  a  system  of 
collective  capital,  that  is  by  a  method  of  production  which  would 
introduce  a  unified  (social  or  'collective')  organization  of  na- 
tional income  on  the  basis  of  collective  or  common  ownership  of 
the  means  of  production  by  all  the  members  of  the  society.  This 
collective  method  of  production  would  remove  the  present  com- 
petitive system,  by  placing  under  official  administration  such  de- 
partments of  production  as  can  be  managed  collectively  (socially 
or  co-operatively),  as  well  as  the  distribution  among  all  of  the 
common  products  of  all,  according  to  the  amount  and  social  util- 
ity of  the  productive  labor  of  each." 

The  contrast  carried  through  this  definition  betAveen 
socialism  and  the  present  social  order  should  be  particu- 
larly noticed.  The  definition  is  complicated,  but  when 
it  is  analyzed  it  will  be  found  to  contain  the  elements 
described  in  the  preceding  chapter.  Perhaps  it  is  de- 
fective in  the  statement  that  socialism  proposes  to  place 
under  official  administration  such  departments  of  pro- 
duction as  can  be  managed  collectively,  without  stating 
directly  that  socialism  maintains  the  possibility  of  a 
collective  management  substantially  of  all  production. 
The  definition  may  also  be  considered  faulty  because  it 
carries  with  it  one  particular  idea  of  distributive  justice ; 
namely,  distribution  according  to  services,  and,  as  we 


DEFINITIONS  OF  SOCIALISM.  21 

have  already  seen,  this  is  not  the  only  idea  of  distribu- 
tive justice  known  to  socialism. 

Professor  Wagner  gives  the  following  definition  of 
socialism  in  the  narrower  or  more  special  sense :  — 

"  Extreme  socialism,  or  the  modern  scientific,  economic  social- 
ism, is  a  system  of  economic  legal  order  opposed  to  the  present 
order.  Socialism  demands  that  the  material  means  of  production, 
that  is,  land  and  capital,  should  not  be,  as  at  present,  mostly  the 
private  property  of  single  private  members  of  the  social  body,  but 
should  be  the  collective  property  of  society  itself;  that,  conse- 
quently, private  undertakings  designed  to  secure  profit  should 
not  stand  on  one  side,  and  wage-earners,  paid  according  to  the 
conditions  of  the  labor-contract,  on  the  other,  these  various  un- 
dertakings and  wage-earners  competing  with  one  another;  that 
production  should  not  be  conducted  by  individual  capitalistic 
managers  according  to  their  individual  estimate  of  demand, 
which  means,  on  the  whole,  an  unregulated  production  depend- 
ent upon  the  course  of  speculation  and  the  influences  of  chance, 
and  that  the  distribution  of  the  product  should  take  place  ac- 
cording to  the  accidents  of  the  law  of  supply  and  demand. 
Socialism  requires,  on  the  contrary,  that  production  should  take 
place  according  to  plans  based  upon  the  carefully  ascertained 
demand  of  the  consumers,  and  that  it  should  be  duly  regulated 
by  public  authority;  that  it  should  be  carried  on  in  a  co-operative 
manner,  or  in  state  and  municipal  institutions,  etc.,  and  that 
the  product  should  be  divided  among  the  producers  in  a  juster 
manner  than  at  present,  when  the  distribution  is  effected  by 
means  of  the  law  of  demand  and  supply." 

This  definition  adds  something  to  our  previously  as- 
certained ideas  of  socialism.  The  first  words,  "  extreme 
socialism,  or  modern,  scientific  economic  socialism,"  are 
worthy  of  note.  The  socialism  popularly  agitated  is  pro- 
nounced extreme,  and  is  opposed  by  implication  to  a 
more  conservative  socialism ;  namely,  socialism  in  the 
larger,  but,  after  all,  truer  sense.  The  second  point  to 


22  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

which  attention  is  called  by  this  definition,  is  the  sci- 
entific character  of  even  this  extreme  socialism.  Mod- 
ern socialism  is  by  implication  contrasted  with  the  more 
or  less  fantastic  schemes  of  earlier  writers ;  and  it  is 
frankly  admitted  that  socialism,  even  in  the  special 
sense,  has  been  placed  upon  a  scientific  basis  by  thinkers 
like  Rodbertus-Jagetzow,  Friedrich  Engels,  and  Karl 
Marx.  The  third  noteworthy  point  in  the  definition 
under  consideration  is  that  which  describes  socialism  as 
a  legal  order.  The  problems  involved  are  largely  prob- 
lems of  law.  Although  it  may  be  going  too  far  to  declare 
that  socialism  is  chiefly,  if  not  exclusively,  a  question 
for  the  jurist,1  it  is  undoubtedly  true  that,  like  other 
economic  questions,  it  has  not  been  adequately  treated 
on  the  side  of  law.  This  definition,  like  the  preceding 
one,  carries  through  it  a  contrast  between  socialism  and 
the  present  industrial  order,  and  brings  out  some  of  the 
weaker  points  of  the  latter.  The  unsystematic,  irreg- 
ular, hap-hazard  character  of  present  production  is  placed 
over  against  the  social  regulation  of  social  production. 
Under  socialism  it  is  proposed,  according  to  this  defi- 
nition, carefully  to  ascertain  the  quantities  of  things  of 
all  kinds  needed  by  the  members  of  the  social  organism, 
and  to  produce  them  regularly  in  the  most  scientific 
manner,  as  a  result  of  which,  it  is  held,  irregularities 
in  production,  crises,  and  industrial  stagnation  can  be 
avoided.  Social  control  thus  replaces  chance.  It  is 
not  stated  exactly  how  products  are  to  be  distributed, 
but  it  is  merely  said  that  the  distribution  aims  to  ap- 
proximate absolute  justice  more  nearly  than  the  present 
system. 

1  This  is  claimed  by  Prof.  Anton  Menger  in  his  work,  "Das  Recht 
auf  den  volleu  Arbeitsertrag." 


DEFINITIONS  OF  SOCIALISM.  23 

We  now  pass  over  to  definitions  given  by  avowed  so- 
cialists, and  it  is  worth  while  to  devote  some  attention  to 
several  of  these.  Among  those  who  belong  to  the  social- 
ists there  is,  perhaps,  no  one  more  conservative  than  Mr. 
Thomas  Kirkup,  in  whose  book,  "  An  Inquiry  Into  So- 
cialism," the  following  statement  is  found  :  — 

"  The  essence  of  socialism  is  this:  it  proposes  that  industry  be 
carried  on  by  associated  laborers  jointly  owning  the  means  of 
production  (land  and  capital).  Whereas  industry  is  at  present 
conducted  by  private  and  competing  capitalists  served  by  wage 
labor,  it  must  in  the  future  be  carried  on  by  associated  labor,  with 
a  collective  capital,  and  with  a  view  to  an  equitable  system  of  dis- 
tribution" (pp.  11  and  12). 

Emphasis  is  laid  on  the  ownership  of  the  means  of 
production  by  the  collective  workers,  and  Mr.  Kirkup 
elsewhere  expressly  states  that  it  is  a  principle  which 
may  be  partially  realized,  even  on  a  small  scale.  While 
a  general  system  is  the  aim  of  socialism,  he  would 
not  refuse  the  name  of  socialism  to  a  co-operative  society 
of  workers  owning  the  means  of  production  and  carrying 
on  an  enterprise  on  their  own  account,  even  under  present 
conditions. 

Mr.  Bellamy,  the  founder  of  the  school  of  socialism 
called  nationalism,  declares  that  "  industrial  self-govern- 
ment is  a  very  convenient  and  accurate  definition  of  na- 
tionalism." The  central  thought  in  socialism,  according 
to  Mr.  Bellamy,  would  seem  to  be  democracy  in  industry. 
At  the  present  time,  while  we  have  democracy  in  politics, 
we  have  in  industry  a  system  to  which,  for  the  most  part, 
we  may  properly  apply  the  term  despotism.  Industry  is 
controlled  by  the  capitalist,  and  the  worker  must  submit 
to  his  commands  or  quit  his  service,  just  as  the  alterna- 
tive of  obedience  to  the  laws  of  the  Czar  is  emigration. 


24  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

The  despotic  principle  in  industry,  while  zealously  main- 
tained as  desirable  by  many,  is  held  by  socialists  to  be 
pernicious ;  and  with  Mr.  Bellamy  they  generally  declare 
that  political  democracy  cannot  be  permanently  main- 
tained, unless  it  is  based  on  economic  democracy. 

The  Nationalists,  in  their  Declaration  of  Principles, 
adopted  early  in  their  history,  did  not  attempt  any  formal 
definition  of  nationalism ;  but  declared  that  they  wished 
to  substitute  a  system  based  on  the  principle  of  associa- 
tion for  "a  system  founded  on  the  brute  principle  of 
competition." 

Perhaps  no  society  of  socialists  includes  in  its  member- 
ship a  larger  number  of  highly  educated  men  than  the 
Fabian  Society  of  England.  One  of  its  members,  Mr. 
William  Clarke,  defines  a  socialist  as  "  one  who  believes 
that  the  necessary  instruments  of  production  should  be 
held  and  organized  by  the  community,  instead  of  by  indi- 
viduals, or  groups  of  individuals,  within  or  outside  of  the 
community."  1 

Another  Fabian,  Mr.  Graham  Wallas,  implies  a  defini- 
tion of  socialism  in  his  statement  that  "  Socialists  work 
for  the  owning  of  the  means  of  production  by  the  com- 
munity and  the  means  of  consumption  by  individuals."  2 

This  society  issues  a  program,  in  which  it  is  stated 
that,  as  it  consists  of  socialists,  it  aims  "  at  the  reorgan- 
ization of  society  by  the  emancipation  of  land  and  indus- 
trial capital  from  individual  and  class  ownership,  and 
the  vesting  of  them  in  the  community  for  the  general 
benefit."  It  is  added  that  "the  society  works  for  the 
transfer  to  the  community  of  the  administration  of  such 

1  Political  Science  Quarterly,  December,  1888,  article  "  Socialism 
in  English  Politics." 

2  Fabian  Essays,  p.  133. 


\ 
DEFINITIONS   OF  SOCIALISM.  25 

industrial  capital  as  can  conveniently  be  managed  so- 
cially."    Elsewhere  in  the  writings  of  the  Fabians  it  is 
plainly  stated  that  practically  all  industrial  capital  can 
conveniently  be  managed  socially. 

The  Social  Democratic  Federation  of  England,  a  body 
pursuing,  perhaps,  methods  more  popular  than  those  of 
the  Fabian  Society,  and  resembling  more  closely  the 
social  democracy  of  Germany,  states  that  its  object  is 
"  The  socialization  of  the  means  of  production,  distribu- 
tion, and  exchange,  to  be  controlled  by  a  democratic 
state  in  the  interests  of  the  entire  community,  and  the 
complete  emancipation  of  labor  from  the  domination  of 
capitalism  and  landlordism,  with  the  establishment  of 
social  and  economic  equality  between  the  sexes."  A  new 
feature  of  this  statement  —  which  carries  with  it  a  defi- 
nition of  socialism  —  is  that  it  brings  out  the  demand  for 
social  and  economic  equality  between  the  sexes;  a  de- 
mand made  by  practically  all  socialistic  societies. 

A  French  socialist  by  the  name  of  Lafargue,  a  son-in- 
law  of  Karl  Marx,  gives  a  definition  which  brings  out 
clearly  the  thought  of  the  latter,  that  socialism  comes  as 
a  result  of  a  natural  evolution,  and  not  as  the  result  of 
man's  determination  to  replace  the  present  social  order 
by  a  better.  He  says :  "  Socialism  is  not  the  system  of 
any  reformer  whatever ;  it  is  the  doctrine  of  those  who 
believe  that  the  existing  system  is  on  the  eve  of  a  fatal 
economic  evolution  which  will  establish  collective  owner- 
ship in  the  hands  of  organizations  of  workers,  in  place  of 
the  individual  ownership  of  capital.  Socialism  is  of  the 
character,  therefore,  of  an  historical  discovery." 1 

1  This  definition  was  given  in  the  New  Nation  of  March  5,  1892. 
It  appeared  originally  in  the  French  paper  Le  Figaro,  which  had 
offered  a  prize  of  one  hundred  francs  for  the  best  definition  of  social- 
ism. This  was  one  of  the  six  hundred  competing' definitions. 


26  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

The  claim  may,  perhaps,  be  made  for  the  social 
democratic  party  of  Germany  by  its  friends,  that  it  has 
developed  beyond  the  stage  of  definitions.  It  issues, 
however,  a  platform  in  which  is  traced  the  evolution 
which  it  is  maintained  will  inevitably  issue  in  socialism, 
by  which  is  meant  social  ownership  of  the  means  of 
production,  special  mention  being  made  of  the  soil,  quar- 
ries, mines,  raw  material,  tools,  machines,  and  the  means 
of  transportation ;  and  it  is  stated  that  production  must 
be  carried  on  by  and  for  society.  The  doctrine  is  also 
brought  out  in  the  program  that  socialism  implies  of 
necessity  a  class  struggle,  and  that  the  emancipation  of 
the  working-class  must  be  achieved  by  the  wage-earners, 
in  opposition  to  all  other  classes. 

When  one  understands  what  socialism  means,  it  can- 
not be  difficult  to  define  the  adjective  socialistic,  which 
at  present  is  generally  used  in  such  an  altogether  vague 
and  indefinite  manner.  That  line  of  policy  is  properly 
designated  "  socialistic  "  which  tends  to  bring  about  so- 
cialism. Manifestly,  then,  not  all  government  activity 
can  be  called  socialistic.  If  the  purpose  or  the  spirit 
of  the  activity  in  question  is  to  render  the  collectivity 
dominant  in  the  economic  sphere,  then  it  must  be  desig- 
nated as  socialistic;  otherwise,  not.  Those  have  studied 
socialism  to  little  purpose  who  imagine  that  the  socialist 
approves  of  all  activity  of  government  whatsoever,  and 
that  he  is  ready  to  indorse  any  plan  which  will  enlarge 
the  functions  of  government.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  it  is 
probable  that  socialists  disapprove  of  nine  projects  out 
of  ten  calculated  to  enlarge  the  sphere  of  government, 
which  are  brought  forward,  nevertheless,  by  some  party 
or  faction.  They  would  disapprove  of  much  of  this 
legislation,  because  they  think  it  not  likely  to  accom- 


DEFINITIONS  OF  SOCIALISM.  27 

plish  the  end  which  its  advocates  have  in  view ;  and  a 
great  deal  of  it  receives  their  condemnation  because  it 
reveals  a  directly  anti-socialistic  spirit.  Much  legisla- 
tion is  designed  to  foster  and  build  up  private  industry. 
Naturally,  all  this  is  rejected  by  socialism.  Subsidies 
and  grants  to  private  enterprise  are  anti-socialistic,  be- 
cause their  purpose  is  to  bolster  up  that  which  socialism 
disapproves.  Bonuses  given  for  the  establishment  of 
manufacturing  plants  are  anti-socialistic.  It  is  said  that 
the  financial  disturbances  in  the  Argentine  Republic  a 
few  years  ago  could  be  traced,  in  part  at  least,  to  gov- 
ernment activity.  It  was  stated  by  a  United  States 
consul  that  "  Instead  of  limiting  the  government  to  the 
doing  of  the  work  for  which  all  governments  are  in- 
stituted among  men,  it  is  notorious  that  the  late  gov- 
ernment authorities  made  use  of  its  credit  to  promote 
enterprises  which  should  have  been  left  to  individual 
enterprise;  to  assist  particular  schemes  which  should 
have  remained  in  the  hands  of  private  parties  ;  to  float 
free  banks  all  over  the  country  based  on  a  paper  capital, 
and  thus  flood  the  avenues  of  trade  with  depreciated 
banknotes ;  to  loan  money  or  issue  cedulas  on  bond  and 
mortgage."  A  governmental  activity  of  this  sort  has 
been  condemned  as  "  socialistic ; "  but  it  is  nearly  all 
directly  contrary  to  the  spirit  of  socialism.  Excessive 
grants  of  pensions  have  also  been  connected  by  writers 
and  speakers  with  the  spirit  of  socialism,  whereas,  as  a 
matter  of  fact,  the  socialists  have  been  strongly  opposed 
to  the  whole  pension  system  in  this  country. 

There  is  a  governmental  activity  of  a  different  sort, 
which  is  regarded  by  some  as  socialistic  and  by  others  as 
anti-socialistic.  Whether  it  is  the  one  or  the  other  must 
depend  on  the  view  which  is  taken  of  its  probable  out- 


28  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL   REFORM. 

come.  Public  education  is  advocated  by  many  because  it" 
is  thought  that  it  tends  to  prepare  men  better  for  the 
existing  society,  and  thus  to  defend  society  against  revo- 
lutionary proposals.  If  one  is  to  take  such  a  view,  then 
one  would  say  that  this  governmental  activity  is  anti- 
socialistic.  If,  however,  one  takes  the  view  that  popular 
education  is  designed  to  awaken  a  general  discontent, 
which  must  lead  to  socialism,  or  that  its  purpose  is  to 
prepare  men  for  socialism,  then  one  must  hold  that  it  is 
socialistic.  It  is  much  to  be  desired  that  a  more  careful 
use  of  the  word  socialistic  should  take  the  place  of  its 
present  loose  use. 


THE  SOCIALISTIC  STATE.  29 


CHAPTER  IV. 
THE   SOCIALISTIC   STATE. 

WE  cannot  understand  socialism  unless  we  give  caic- 
ful  attention  to  the  attitude  which  socialists  take  with 
respect  to  the  state.  It  is  in  respect  to  this  attitude  that 
socialists  differ  among  themselves,  perhaps  as  widely  as 
in  regard  to  any  doctrine. 

We  can  conceive  of  a  socialism  which  would  imply 
simply  the  present  state,  enlarged  in  such  a  manner  that 
it  would  include  within  its  functions  the  production  and 
distribution  of  wealth.  It  might  be  said,  however,  in 
general,  that  no  active  socialist  would  approve  of  this 
kind  of  socialism,  because  socialists  do  not  view  the  pres- 
ent state  altogether  with  favor.  Some  socialists  desire 
to  change  the  existing  state  in  minor  matters,  while  oth- 
ers wish  to  alter  it  radically,  and  are  inclined  to  oppose 
anything  likely  to  strengthen  it.  The  German  social 
democrats  take  the  latter  attitude  with  respect  to  the 
state.  They,  indeed,  go  so  far  as  to  say  that  they  desire 
the  abolition  of  the  state.  But  it  must  be  borne  in  mind 
that  they  use  the  word  state,  as  they  do  "  capital,"  and 
many  other  terms,  in  a  technical  sense  peculiar  to  them- 
selves. When  they  say  that  they  desire  to  abolish  the 
state,  they  have  in  mind  the  state  which  stands  for  a 
class,  and  which  promotes  the  interests  of  that  class  by 
repressive  measures  designed  to  keep  down  the  other 
classes  while  they  are  exploited. 

The  German  social  democrats  are  not  only  socialists, 


30  SOCIALISM  AND   SOCIAL   REFORM. 

they  are  also  democrats,  and  they  live  in  a  state  which  is 
anything  but  democratic.  They  fear  the  present  state, 
and  they  look  with  little  favor,  or  with  positive  opposi- 
tion, upon  plans  to  extend  its  economic  functions.  This 
is  what  they  mean  by  their  opposition  to  state  socialism. 
State  socialism  means  to  correct  the  wrongs  and  advance 
the  interests  of  the  masses  by  economic  measures,  but 
does  not  regard  it  as  necessary  to  change  radically  the 
political  constitution  of  the  state.  The  social  democrats 
of  Germany,  at  their  convention  in  1892,  consequently 
felt  called  upon  to  denounce  state  socialism  as  conserva- 
tive, while  declaring  that  social  democracy  was  a  revolu- 
tionary force.  Their  opposition  to  the  state  is  like  their 
opposition  to  state  socialism.  They  define  the  state  as 
"  an  organized  power  for  the  maintenance  of  the  actually 
existing  social  relations  of  property  and  class  domina- 
tion." The  socialistic  state  to  which  they  look  forward 
—  one  which  will  recognize  no  class  interests,  but  will 
promote  the  interests  of  all  equally  —  is  held  by  them 
to  be  something  so  different  that  it  cannot  be  properly 
called  a  state.  Their  talk,  then,  about  the  abolition  of 
the  state  implies  a  doctrine  not  only  with  respect  to 
future  social  organization,  but  also  with  respect  to  the 
existing  state. 

The  English  Fabians  and  the  American  socialists  do  not 
talk  about  the  abolition  of  the  state  ;  and  when  a  social- 
ist in  England  or  the  United  States  indulges  in  such  talk, 
it  may  safely  be  taken  for  granted  that  he  stands  under 
foreign,  particularly  German,  influence.  This  is  natural 
enough,  because  the  political  constitution  of  the  state  in 
each  of  these  countries  is  more  democratic,  and  can  be 
more  readily  made  to  serve  the  interests  of  the  masses 
without  radical  political  changes. 


THE  SOCIALISTIC  STATE.  31 

All  active  agitators  of  socialism  want  a  democratic 
state,  because  they  wish  that  control  of  the  collectivity 
over  the  economic  life  should  be  exercised  in  behalf  of 
the  masses.  They  are  all  not  merely  socialists,  but 
democrats,  although  they  do  not  find  it  everywhere 
equally  necessary  to  lay  emphasis  upon  their  democracy. 
Nevertheless,  we  find  all  socialists  advocating  political 
changes ;  and  it  may  be  said  that  the  country  whose 
political  institutions  they  view  with  most  favor  is  Switz- 
erland. We  may  mention  two  institutions  found  in 
Switzerland  which  meet  with  almost,  if  not  quite,  univer- 
sal approval ;  namely,  the  referendum,  compelling,  under 
certain  circumstances,  the  reference  of  laws  to  the  people 
for  acceptance  or  rejection ;  and  the  initiative,  giving  to 
a  prescribed  number  of  people  the  right  to  propose  laws, 
which  must  be  submitted  to  the  people  as  a  whole  for 
acceptance  or  rejection.  Proportional  representation  is 
a  third  political  reform  which  meets  with  general  favor 
on  the  part  of  socialists.  As  is  well  known,  this  pro- 
poses the  election  of  legislators  on  a  general  ticket,  with 
such  arrangements  that  parties  and  factions  would  have 
a  representation  in  proportion  to  the  number  of  votes 
which  they  cast.  One-tenth  of  the  people  could  thus, 
by  cumulating  their  votes,  have  one  representative.  The 
reason  why  the  socialists  favor  these  measures  is  because 
they  tend  to  keep  government  in  the  hands  of  the 
people. 

It  is  for  the  same  reason  that  all  socialists  are  working 
for  the  decentralization  of  government.  They  look  upon 
the  present  state  as  too  highly  centralized.  They  wish 
to  transfer  functions  from  central  governments  to  local 
political  units,  in  order  that  the  business  of  the  people 
may  be  near  the  people.  It  is  so  far  from  being  the 


32  SOCIALISM  AND    SOCIAL  REFORM. 

truth  that  they  favor  centralization,  that  most  of  them 
go  to  what  would  ordinarily  be  called  extreme  lengths  in 
opposition  to  centralization,  and  in  advocacy  of  measures 
which  may  build  up  the  local  political  unit.  Local  self- 
government,  even  of  an  extreme  form,  is  a  watchword 
among  them. 

The  following  two  quotations  from  the  Fabian  social- 
ists are  typical,  and  indicate  a  general   attitude  of  so- 
cialists in  all  countries  :  — 
i 

"  The  division  of  the  country  into  clearly  denned  areas,  each 
with  its  elected  authority,  is  essential  to  any  effective  scheme  of 
organization.  It  is  one  of  the  signs  of  the  coming  age  that,  in 
perfect  unconsciousness  of  the  nature  of  his  act,  Mr.  Kitchie  has 
established  the  commune.  He  has  divided  England  into  districts 
ruled  by  county  councils,  and  has  thus  created  the  machinery 
without  which  socialism  was  impracticable." 1 

"  At  present  the  state  machine  has  practically  broken  down 
under  the  strain  of  spreading  democracy,  the  work  being  mainly 
local,  and  the  machinery  mainly  central.  Without  efficient  local 
machinery  the  replacing  of  private  enterprise  by  state  enterprise 
is  out  of  the  question."  2 

Still  a  third  socialist  speaks  of  the  formation  of  a  defi- 
nite socialist  party  as  identical  with  "  a  party  pledged  to 
the  communalization  of  all  the  means  of  production  and 
exchange." 

The  function  of  a  national  government  in  socialism  is 
held  to  be  a  federalization  of  municipalities,  and  the 
equalization  of  their  natural  advantages,  possibly  by  a 
system  of  taxation  to  yield  the  funds  for  general  ex- 
penses. 

When  one  reflects  upon  the  extreme  position  in  favor 

1  Annie  Besant,  Fabian  Essays,  pp.  152-3. 
8  G,  Bernard  Shaw,  Fabian  Essays,  p  187. 


THE  SOCIALISTIC  STATE.  33 

of  local  self-government,  taken  very  generally  by  social- 
ists, one  cannot  help  wondering  whether  adequate  provis- 
ion has  been  made  for  those  businesses  which  must  be 
organized  on  a  national  scale,  like  railways  and  tele- 
graphs. The  tendency  of  socialistic  thought,  however,  it 
may  be  said,  is  one  which  lays  increasing  emphasis  upon 
municipalization  rather  than  nationalization  of  industry. 
The  nationalists  in  the  United  States  may,  perhaps,  be 
regarded  as  an  exception.  They  speak  about  the  national- 
ization of  industry ;  and  one  of  their  leaders  says  that, 
"Nationalism  has  given  American  socialism  a  distinc- 
tively national  cast,  as  socialism  in  France  has  assumed 
a  distinctively  communal  cast."  At  the  same  time,  the 
special  activity  of  the  nationalists  has  been  devoted  to 
measures  designed  to  increase  the  powers  of  the  local 
political  unit;  and  the  writer,  just  quoted,  adds  to  his 
remarks  about  the  national  cast  of  American  socialism 
the  statement :  "  Nationalism  has,  to  a  very  great  ex- 
tent, promoted  the  development  of  interest  in  enlarged 
municipal  functions,  as  witness  the  nationalist  agitation 
for  a  municipal  lighting  law  in  Massachusetts."  It 
would  seem,  then,  that  the  American  socialists  known 
as  nationalists,  after  all,  fall  in  with  the  general  social- 
istic  tendency  to  favor  especially  the  upbuilding  of  local 
self-government. 

Equally  characteristic  of  the  socialism  of  to-day  is  the 
general  desire,  on  the  part  of  socialists,  to  reduce  the 
functions  of  government  to  a  minimum.  There  is  a  gen- 
eral agreement  among  them  that  there  should  be  as  little 
government  as  is  compatible  with  their  main  ends.  They 
all  favor  whatever  government  or  regulation  is  necessary 
to  secure  the  socialistic  production  and  distribution  of 
wealth  j  and  they  will  indorse  all  those  measures  which 


34  SOCIALISM  AK1)   SOCIAL   UEFOltM. 

are  held  to  be  necessary  to  guarantee  opportunities  to  all, 
for  the  full  development  of  all  their  faculties.  But 
beyond  this  they  will  not  go,  and  they  continually  seek 
to  devise  plans  for  the  accomplishment  of  these  ends 
with  the  least  possible  exercise  of  governmental  author- 
ity.1 It  can  safely  be  said  that,  outside  the  educational 
and  economic  spheres,  they  advocate  a  general  laissez 
fn  ire,  or  non-interference  policy.  The  state  church,  for 
example,  is  not  of  necessity  incompatible  with  socialism ; 
but,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  socialist  parties  invariably 
oppose  anything  of  the  kind;  and  the  German  social 
democrats,  in  their  platform,  expressly  declare  religion 
to  be  a  private  matter.  Socialists  sometimes  say  what 
they  desire  is  not  a  government  of  men  by  men,  but  an 
administration  of  things.  Some  of  them  hope  that  what 
they  call  administration  may  take  the  place  altogether  of 
government,  by  which  they  evidently  mean  repressive 
measures  designed  to  control  individuals. 

Friedrich  Engels,  who  with  Karl  Marx  was  the  founder 
of  what  is  called  German  scientific  socialism,  uses  these 
words  to  bring  out  this  thought :  "  As  soon  as  there  is 
no  longer  any  social  class  to  be  oppressed ;  as  soon  as 
class  domination  and  individual  struggle  for  existence, 
caused  by  past  anarchy  in  production,  are  removed  with 
all  their  conflicts  and  excesses,  there  will  be  nothing 
more  to  repress  which  would  require  a  special  repres- 
sive power,  that  is  to  say,  a  state.  The  first  act  in  which 
the  state  really  appears  as  the  representative  of  society 

1  The  French  socialist  leader,  M.  Jules  Guesde,  says  that  the  aims 
of  Socialism  have  been  correctly  stated  by  John  Stuart  Mill  in  his 
autobiography  in  these  words :  "  The  social  problem  of  the  future  we 
considered  to  be,  how  to  unite  the  greatest  individual  liberty  of  action 
with  a  common  ownership  in  the  raw  material  of  the  globe,  and  an 
equal  participation  of  all  in  the  benefits  of  combined  labor." 


THE  SOCIALISTIC  STATE.  35 

as  a  whole,  —  namely,  the  seizure  of  the  means  of  pro- 
duction in  the  name  of  society,  —  is  at  the  same  time 
its  last  independent  act  as  a  state.  Interference  of  the 
state  in  social  relations  gradually  becomes  superfluous  in 
one  department  after  another,  and  finally  of  itself  ceases 
(goes  to  sleep).  The  place  of  government  over  persons 
is  taken  by  administration  of  things  and  the  management 
of  productive  processes." 1 

Herr  Bebel,  in  his  work,  "-Woman  and  Socialism," 
gives  a  partial  enumeration  of  the  public  institutions 
which  he  holds  will  disappear  with  the  introduction  of 
socialism.  He  mentions  ministers,  parliaments,  stand- 
ing armies,  police,  courts,  attorneys,  taxation ;  the  place 
of  them  all  being  taken  by  administrative  colleges  or 
boards,  which  are  to  surround  themselves  with  the  best 
arrangements  for  production  and  distribution,  for  the  de- 
termination of  necessary  supplies,  and  for  the  introduc- 
tion and  application  of  the  best  improvements  in  art,  in 
education,  in  the  means  of  communication  and  transpor- 
tation, and  in  the  productive  processes.  He  hopes  that 
the  former  representatives  of  the  state  will  take  their 
places  in  the  various  callings,  and  help  to  increase  the 
productive  wealth  and  conveniences  of  society  with  their 
intelligence  and  their  mental  and  physical  powers.  To 
be  sure,  this  is  connected  with  certain  moral  improve- 
ments which  he  trusts  the  introduction  of  socialism  will 
bring  with  it ;  and  it  is  not  by  any  means  true  that  all 
socialists  share  his  optimism  in  regard  to  the  immediate 
moral  effects  of  socialism.2 

1  This  statement,  peculiar  to  the  German  Social  Democracy,  is 
taken  from  Engels's  "  Die  Entwicklung  des  Sozialismus  von  der 
Utopie  zur  Wissenschaft." 

8  See  "Die  Frau  und  Sozialismus,"  by  August  Bebel,  pp.  312,  314. 


36  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

There  are  different  views  with  regard  to  the  selection 
of  those  who  are  to  conduct  the  socialistic  state;  and 
the  modern  socialist  is  cautious  about  speaking  dogmat- 
ically on  points  of  this  kind,  for  he  tells  us  that  it  is 
unscientific  to  attempt  to  give  precise  details  in  regard 
to  future  social  organization.  However,  it  is  held  that, 
whatever  the  arrangements,  they  must  be  thoroughly 
democratic.  There  is  an  inclination  to  favor  the  elec- 
tion of  headmen,  or  selectmen,  as  they  may  be  called, 
—  using  an  American  expression,  —  by  popular  vote  of 
the  workers.  Mr.  Bellamy,  on  the  other  hand,  in  his 
"  Looking  Backward,"  describes  a  different  socialistic 
state,  in  which  the  workers  have  no  vote,  but  are  di- 
rected by  those  elected  by  persons  who  have  served  their 
time  in  the  industrial  army. 


I 
MISAPPREHENSIONS   CONCERNING   SOCIALISM.     37 


CHAPTER  V. 

SOME  MISAPPREHENSIONS  CONCERNING  THE  NATURE 
OF    8Qf.TAT.TSM. 

IT  will  prove  helpful,  at  least  to  those  not  accustomed 
to  economic  discussions,  if  brief  attention  is  given  to 
a  few  current  opinions  concerning  socialism,  which  are 
based  upon  a  failure  to  understand  its  true  nature.  One 
of  these  opinions  most  frequently  encountered  is  that 
socialism  proposes  to  divide  up  all  property  equally 
among  all  the  members  of  society.  This  is  an  as- 
sumption upon  which  rests  many  a  popular  refutation 
of  socialism.  It  is  held  that  if  all  property  should 
be  divided  up  to-day,  to-morrow  the  old  inequalities 
would  reappear.  It  is  furthermore  urged  that  if  all 
wealth  were  equally  divided,  the  share  of  one  person 
would  not  be  considerable.  Familiar  to  all  is  the  story 
of  the  banker  Rothschild,  who,  when  a  poor  man  ex- 
pressed a  longing  for  communism,  took  a  thaler  from  his 
pocket  and  giving  it  to  the  man,  told  him  that  was  his 
share  of  the  wealth  of  a  Kothschild.  What  socialism 
really  proposes  is  not  the  division  of  property,  but,  as 
we  have  already  seen,  the  concentration  of  productive 
property,  in  fact,  its  complete  unification.  This  is  suf- 
ficiently apparent  to  any  one  who  reflects  at  all  upon  the 
preceding  chapters.  Manifestly  the  re-appearance  of  the 
old  inequalities  would  then  be  an  impossibility,  whatever 
else  might  happen.  In  this  connection  we  must  also 


38  SOCIALISM  AND   SOCIAL  REFORM. 

bear  in  mind  that  socialism  goes  down  beneatli  surface 
phenomena  to  underlying  causes,  and  that  is  forgotten 
by  those  who  urge  flimsy  objections  of  the  kind  men- 
tioned against  socialism.  They  suppose  that  a  division 
of  wealth  takes  place,  and  then  the  production  of  wealth 
goes  on  as  at  the  present  time ;  whereas,  nothing  could 
be  further  from  the  thoughts  of  the  socialists.  Similarly, 
it  is  not  a  question  of  the  wealth  which  actually  exists, 
but  of  the  wealth  which  the  socialists  propose  to  bring 
into  existence.  Socialism,  then,  does  not  propose  a  grand 
"  divide." 

A  further  misapprehension  concerning  the  nature  of 
socialism  is  that  which  traces  it  to  the  vaporings  of  wild 
and  unpractical  theorists.  It  is  essential  to  a  compre- 
hension of  the  nature  of  socialism,  to  know  that  it  is  a 
system  of  industrial  society  which  has  found,  advocates 
among  many  gifted,  learned,  and  very  practical  men. 
The  leaders  of  socialism  in  the  present  century  have 
generally  been  men  of  extraordinary  capacity,  placing 
them  far  above  the  ordinary  man.  One  of  the  earliest 
English  socialists,  Robert  Owen,  was  at  one  time  so  suc- 
cessful in  cotton  spinning  that  he  was  called  "the  prince 
of  cotton  spinners,"  and  he  amassed  a  large  fortune. 
The  three  early  leaders  of  the  modern  German  social 
democracy  are  Karl  Marx,  Friedrich  Engels,  and  Ferdi- 
nand Lassalle.  Karl  Marx  is  recognized  by  friend  and 
foe  as  one  of  the  most  learned  and  gifted  economic 
thinkers  of  the  present  century ;  Friedrich  Engels  is 
one  with  whom  economic  philosophy  must  deal,  and  it 
is  said,  besides,  that  he  has  been  more  than  ordinarily 
successful  in  business;  while  the  gifts  of  Ferdinand 
Lassalle  attracted  the  attention  of  all  with  whom  he 
came  in  contact,  Wilhelm  von  Humbohlt  calling  him  "a 


MISAPPREHENSIONS  CONCERNING  SOCIALISM.    39 

miraculous  child,"  and  Bismarck  declaring  in  the  impe- 
rial parliament  that  he  was  one  of  the  most  gifted  and 
amiable  men  with  whom  he  had  ever  associated.  Bebel 
and  Liebknecht,  the  political  leaders  of  the  German 
social  democracy  of  to-day,  whatever  we  may  otherwise 
think  of  them,  have  talents  and  qualifications  which 
enable  them  to  hold  their  own  with  the  leaders  of  the 
other  great  political  parties. 

Another  prominent  German  social  democrat,  a  manu- 
facturer, has  a  fortune  which,  it  is  said,  places  him 
among  the  millionnaires  of  his  country. 

The  English  socialists  to-day  include  men  who  were 
trained  at  the  great  English  universities,  and  who  have 
been  successful  in  whatever  they  have  undertaken. 
Among  the  extremists,  we  may  even  mention  a  man 
like  William  Morris,  who  was  prominently  spoken  of 
for  the  post  of  poet  laureate  when  it  was  made  vacant 
by  the  death  of  Tennyson. 

Nor  can  it  be  denied  that  those  who  are  giving  social- 
ism its  shape  in  Switzerland,  France,  the  United  States, 
and  elsewhere,  are  men  who  must  command  our  respect 
on  account  of  their  capacities  of  every  sort.  Whoever 
would  understand  what  socialism  means  to-day,  must 
bear  in  mind  the  unquestionable  fact  that  it  includes  in 
its  ranks  men  of  practical  sagacity,  as  well  as  native 
talent  and  learning. 

It  follows,  quite  naturally,  from  what  has  been  said, 
that  socialism  is  not  a  scheme  of  criminals  for  theft  and 
robbery.  It  can,  at  the  present  day,  scarcely  be  neces- 
sary to  dwell  on  this.  It  is  worth  while,  however,  to 
call  attention  to  the  fact  that  socialism  is  not  a  scheme 
of  social  reconstruction  which  meets  with  favor  on  the 
part  of  criminals.  It  is  a  curious  fact,  but  one  well- 


40  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

known  by  those  who  have  given  attention  to  crime,  that 
the  criminal  classes  are  orthodox  and  conservative  in 
their  religious  as  well  as  social  opinions.  An  exhaustive 
treatment  of  the  reasons  for  this  fact  —  which,  natu- 
rally, conveys  no  reproach  to  orthodoxy  of  either  sort  — 
cannot  now  be  given.  The  curious  reader  must  consult 
works  on  criminal  anthropology.  Attention  may  be 
called,  however,  to  a  few  characteristics  of  the  criminal. 
He  is  a  man  who  is  below  the  average  in  mental  capacity, 
although  he  may  be  shrewd  and  cunning.  He  has  not 
that  mental  alertness  and  boldness  which  would  lead 
him  to  deviate  from  received  opinions.  Moreover,  he  is 
extremely  superstitious,  and  often  hopes  to  find  exculpa- 
tion in  the  observance  of  religious  forms,  and  has  even 
been  known  to  trust  to  his  religion  to  help  him  in  crime. 
Prayers  for  his  success  in  robbery  are  not  infrequent 
among  superstitious  and  degraded  people,  and  an  Italian 
criminologist,  who  examined  two  hundred  murderers, 
found  them  all  religious.  Naples  is  said  to  be  the  most 
religious  city  in  Europe,  and  yet  the  most  criminal. 
Sismondi,  writing  of  the  Italians  of  his  day,  said :  "  The 
murderer,  still  stained  with  the  blood  he  has  just  shed, 
devoutly  fasts,  even  while  he  is  meditating  a  fresh 
assassination." l 

A  well-known  American  wrote  an  article  for  a  promi- 
nent journal  during  the  campaign  in  which  Mr.  Henry 
George  was  a  candidate  for  the  mayoralty  of  New  York 
City,  and  attempted  to  estimate  the  number  of  votes 
which  Mr.  George  might  receive.  This  writer  called 
attention  to  the  fact  that  there  were  20,000  criminals  in 
New  York  City,  and  intimated  that  they  would  all  cast 
their  votes  for  Mr.  George.  The  author  of  this  book, 
1  See  "  The  Criminal,"  by  Havelock  Ellis,  pp.  156, 157.  London,  1890. 


MISAPPREHENSIONS   CONCERNING   SOCIALISM.    41 

although  not  an  adherent  of  Mr.  George,  felt  that  this 
was  probably  an  injustice  to  his  followers,  and  was  led 
to  make  some  inquiries  into  the  political  affiliations  of 
criminals.  He  formed  the  conclusion  that  they  would 
generally  be  found  to  be  adherents  of  one  of  the  two 
older  political  parties,  and  that  for  this  reason,  in  addi- 
tion to  those  already  mentioned,  the  criminal  is  a  short- 
sighted man ;  and,  indeed,  short-sightedness  may  be  called 
so  essentially  characteristic  of  crime,  that  it  is  not  far 
out  of  the  way  to  define  crime  as  short-sightedness.  The 
criminal  does  not  look  to  social  reconstruction  for  which 
years  must  pass ;  but,  without  thinking  so  far  ahead,  he 
adopts  plans  which  will  bring  him  gain  to-day  or  to-mor- 
row or  next  day.  He  adheres  to  a  party  which  is  able 
to  help  him  at  once  when  he  becomes  involved  in  diffi- 
culties. He  desires  what  is  called  in  American  politics 
a  "  pull ; "  and  in  consequence  of  this  it  is  probable  that 
in  a  given  community  he  will,  as  a  rule,  belong  to  one  of 
the  two  great  political  parties,  but  to  that  one  which  has 
been  the  stronger  in  his  own  city,  or  more  particularly, 
perhaps,  his  own  ward.  In  the  prosecution  of  his  in- 
quiries, the  author  wrote  a  letter  to  a  gentleman  who  had 
long  worked  among  the  inmates  of  the  Elmira  Reforma- 
tory, and  asked  him  whether  he  thought  there  would  be 
any  considerable  number  of  Henry  George  men,  or  social- 
ists, or  even  anarchists,  among  them,  and  the  reply  was, 
that  he  thought  not.  A  very  interesting  confirmation  of 
this  opinion  has  been  given  in  a  vote  which  was  taken 
in  the  Reformatory,  Oct.  24,  and  25,  1892,  the  purpose 
of  which  was  to  allow  the  inmates  to  express  political 
preferences  for  president  and  vice-president  of  the  United 
States.  The  total  number  of  ballots  cast  was  909,  divided 
as  follows :  Democratic,  401 ;  Republican,  394 ;  People's 


42  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

Party,  15 ;  Prohibition,  1 ;  defective,  8.  It  will  be  ob 
served  that  the  People's  Party,  which  approximates  most 
nearly  to  socialism,  received  only  fifteen  votes,  while  not 
one  socialistic  vote  was  cast. 

It  has  already  been  mentioned  that  criminals  are  in- 
clined to  be  orthodox  in  their  religious  views,  so  far  as 
they  have  any.  Of  course,  the  religion  itself  is  likely  to 
be  a  caricature  of  any  true  religion ;  but  so  far  as  formal 
religious  doctrines  are  concerned,  the  views  of  criminals 
harmonize  with  those  which  at  a  given  time  and  place  are 
customarily  regarded  as  orthodox.  Socialism  proposes  not 
a  religious  society,  but  an  economic  society,  and  has  no 
direct  connection  with  any  peculiar  religious  doctrines. 
There  will  be  found  among  socialists  men  of  all  religious 
views,  as  there  will  be  among  adherents  of  any  other  party. 
Some  socialists  are  extremely  conservative  in  their  reli- 
gious views,  while  it  frequently  happens  that  among  the 
most  conservative  adherents  of  the  existing  social  order 
there  will  be  found  persons  of  what  are  called  liberal,  or 
even  loose,  religious  views.  It  has  been  held  by  some 
that  Christianity  has  a  peculiarly  close  connection  with 
socialism,  and  that  is  true  so  far  as  both  aim  to  help  the 
weak  and  to  lift  the  fallen ;  but  it  cannot  be  said  that 
their  means  are  necessarily  identical.  If  a  Christian  can 
be  made  to  believe  that  socialism  will  bring  the  good  to 
the  masses  of  mankind  which  its  adherents  claim  for  it, 
then  he  must  necessarily  accept  socialism.  But  that  is 
only  to  say  that  a  Christian  must  be  an  honest  man.  The 
very  point  at  issue  is  whether  or  not  socialism  will  bring 
what  it  promises.  If  so,  then  no  man  who  is  upright  can 
refuse  to  give  adherence  to  it,  when  once  he  is  convinced 
that  such  will  be  the  case,  whatever  may  be  his  religious 
doctrines. 


MlSAPPHEHENSIONS  CONCERNING  SOCIALISM.    48 

Socialism  often  has  to  meet  the  reproach  that  it  is  hos- 
tile to  the  family  as  a  social  institution,  and  not  infre- 
quently we  see  the  statement  that  socialism  means  free 
love.  If  we  again  call  to  mind  the  fact  that  socialism  is 
an  economic  system,  we  shall  see  that  it  has  only  an  indi- 
rect connection  with  views  concerning  the  family,  and  we 
shall  not  be  surprised  to  learn  that  among  the  socialists, 
as  among  other  people,  there  are  those  who  hold  different 
views  concerning  the  marriage  tie.  It  is  necessary,  how- 
ever, to  dwell  upon  the  socialistic  position  with  respect 
to  the  family  to  understand  fully  its  nature.  The  socialist 
to-day  tells  vis  that  the  modern  industrial  system  is  already 
destroying  the  family,  and  that,  if  it  continues  its  opera- 
tions, the  family  will  probably  disappear  within  a  century. 
He  claims  that  modern  industrialism  is  far  worse  in  its 
action  upon  the  family  than  was  slavery ;  for  the  latter 
only  exceptionally  separated  the  members  of  the  family, 
whereas  the  arrangements  of  industrial  society  to-day 
regularly  and  habitually  separate  husband  and  wife  and 
children.  Our  socialist  points  to  the  manufacturing 
towns  of  New  England,  which  are  popularly  called  "  she 
towns,"  because  they  consist  of  women  and  children. 
And  with  these  he  brings  in  contrast  the  "  stag  camps  " 
of  the  West ;  namely,  the  logging-camps  of  the  lumber 
districts,  gold  and  silver  mining-camps,  and  the  boarding- 
tents  of  the  iron  ore  region.  The  socialist  has  strong 
support  for  his  claim  that  industrialism  is  destroying  the 
family,  and  in  industrial  centres  has  already  accom- 
plished a  good  share  of  its  work,  so  far  as  homes  are 
concerned.  An  investigator1  in  the  Department  of 
Labor,  in  an  address  delivered  before  the  World's  Fair 
Labor  Congress  at  Chicago,  entitled,  "The  Disintegra- 
1  Mr.  Ethelbert  Stewart. 


44  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

tion  of  the  Families  of  the  Workingmen,"  spoke  about 
the  effect  of  modern  industry  on  the  family.  First  of  all, 
he  called  attention  to  the  fact  that  divorces  are  increas- 
ing, and  marriages  decreasing,  in  industrial  centres,  and 
that  without  any  change  in  the  laws.  It  appears  that 
relatively  the  number  of  marriages  in  Chicago  has  never 
since  been  so  great  as  in  1873,  and  that  the  same  is  true 
with  respect  to  Philadelphia.  On  the  other  hand,  it  ap- 
pears that  the  number  of  divorces  in  Pittsburg  increased 
two  hundred  per  cent  between  1870  and  1880.  It  would 
further  appear  from  investigations  that  the  chief  causes 
for  divorce  are  economic.  It  is  the  necessity  for  the  sep- 
aration of  the  members  of  the  family,  in  order  that  they 
may  gain  support.  These  are  the  words  of  the  speaker 
on  the  occasion  referred  to :  — 

"  Every  one  who  has  gone  through  the  cotton-mill  towns  of 
New  England  and  the  South  has  seen  house  after  house  locked 
up,  and  little  faces  peering  out  at  the  windows.  The  mother  has 
gone  to  work  in  the  mill,  and  left  her  baby  in  the  house.  The 
father  is  working  somewhere  else,  probably  in  another  State.  I 
submit  that  a  family  is  pretty  well  disintegrated  when  this  is  its 
normal  condition  —  the  every-day  life  of  the  family.  I  have 
walked  along  rows  of  factory  tenement  houses,  and  found  three 
out  of  five  deserted  by  father,  mother,  and  all  the  children  big 
enough  to  work,  while  the  babies  are  left  to  do  the  best  they 
can."  1 

Herr  Paul  Gohre  has  written  a  noteworthy  work, 
entitled  "  Three  Months  a  Factory  Hand,"  in  which  he 
narrates  his  experiences  in  a  factory  in  Saxony,  Ger- 
many. This  Mr.  Gohre  was  a  theological  student,  who 
desired  to  see  for  himself  the  mode  of  life  of  the  Ger- 
man workingmen,  and  to  experience  their  life  and  to 

1  Mr.  Ethelbert  Stewart's  address,  delivered  before  the  World's 
Fair  Labor  Congress,  Aug.  30, 1893. 


MISAPPREHENSIONS  CONCERNING   SOCIALISM.    45 

learn  from  familiar  every-day  conversation  with  them 
their  actual  views  and  aspirations.  The  report  which 
Mr.  Gohre  has  given  in  his  work  is  regarded  as  a  re- 
markably faithful  and  impartial  picture ;  and  he  tells 
us,  among  other  things,  that  the  present  economic  con- 
ditions are  destroying  the  family  of  the  wage-earner. 
These  are  his  own  words  :  — 

"  Another  fact  infinitely  significant  and  ominous,  which  in 
daily  intercourse  with  this  class  is  continually  forced  on  the 
attention,  is  that  in  consequence  of  these  conditions  throughout 
wide  circles  of  the  industrial  population  of  our  great  cities,  the 
traditional  form  of  the  family  no  longer  exists.  The  old  organ- 
ism, based  on  the  consanguinity  of  parents  and  children,  and 
built  up  exclusively  of  one  kinship,  —  with  the  sole  exception,  in 
the  higher  classes,  of  more  or  less  closely  associated  servants,  — 
has  given  place  to-day,  in  the  ranks  of  the  workingmen,  to  groups 
of  people,  kindred  and  stranger,  formed  upon  purely  economic 
needs  of  a  common  lodging  and  living,  and  formed,  moreover,  by 
chance.  Inclinations  of  relationship  have  plainly  given  way  to 
economic  obligations.  The  mother  has  evolved  into  the  house- 
hold executive,  who  receives  from  husband,  grown  children,  and 
stranger  inmate  alike,  a  fixed  sum,  with  which  she  contracts  to 
meet  the  demands  of  food,  rent,  laundry  work,  and  the  like  ;  as 
to  clothing,  each  relies  upon  himself. 

"It  is  not  the  social  democrats  and  their  agitation  who  are  re- 
sponsible for  this  :  precisely  these  conditions  are  the  result  of  our 
whole  industrial  system,  which  makes  it  impossible  for  working- 
men  and  their  families  to  share  their  meals  in  common ;  which 
compels  them  to  occupy  the  most  ill-arranged  and  crowded  dwell- 
ings; and  to  admit  utter  strangers,  often  in  rapid  succession,  to 
the  most  intimate  family  relations,  such  as  used  to  be  held  sacred 
for  the  family  itself.  Let  one  but  remember  the  dense  packing 
of  the  '  rooms,'  that  is  to  say,  the  family  dwelling-places,  in 
such  workingmen' s  barracks,  or  the  old  country  houses  altered  to 
their  plan;  the  impossibility  of  isolating  one  from  the  other;  the 
thinness  of  the  walls  in  houses  so  hastily  constructed,  that  they 


46  SOCIALISM  AND   SOCIAL  REFOliM. 

permit  every  loudly  spoken  word  to  be  distinctly  heard  by  the 
neighbors;  the  single  corridor  for  the  three  or  four  'rooms'  on 
every  story,  whose  use,  as  well  as  that  of  the  water-supply, 
closets,  etc.,  must  be  in  common.  All  this  leads  to  a  promiscuity 
of  daily  intercourse,  a  publicity  of  family  life,  which  is  appalling 
to  the  beholder,  and  which  must  inevitably  bring  about  the  de- 
struction of  domesticity  itself.  It  is  absolutely  impossible  that 
the  children  of  such  families  shall  not  live  like  brothers  and  sis- 
ters of  one  blood,  when  the  corridoir  is  their  place  of  common 
resort,  their  playground,  their  opportunity  for  confidences;  that 
growing  lads  and  girls  shall  not  come  into  the  closest  contact 
with  each  other;  that  the  men  shall  not  find  continual  occasion 
for  interchange  of  ideas,  and  often  of  blows;  that  the  women 
shall  not  intimately  know  every  nook  and  corner,  every  short- 
coming, every  article  of  clothing  and  of  household  use  among 
their  neighbors;  nay,  more,  that  the  common  use  of  such  arti- 
cles, as,  for  example,  the  borrowing  and  lending  of  cooking  uten- 
sils, shall  not  introduce  a  distinctly  communistic  character  into 
the  housekeeping  of  the  scantily  equipped  families.  Add  to  this 
the  confinement  and  narrowness  of  the  individual  quarters,  which 
drive  the  men  out-of-doors  in  the  evening,  into  the  streets  and 
fields  when  it  is  possible,  or  into  some  neighbor's  larger  and 
better  room,  or  the  beer  saloons  and  assembly  halls.  Let  one  re- 
member, further,  how  much  this  congestion  is  aggravated  by  the 
presence  of  lodgers  and  strangers,  who  bring  with  them  their  own 
customs  and  usages,  their  different  manners,  standards,  and  re- 
quirements, which,  strange  and  often  enough  offensive,  they  yet 
express  and  put  in  practice  as  freely  as  in  their  own  homes.  Let 
one  remember  that  these  strangers  leave  the  house  with  the  hus- 
band and  grown-up  children  and  return  with  them,  and  habitually 
sit  around  the  same  table  with  them  until  bedtime,  reading,  smok- 
ing, talking,  or  card-playing.  It  is  a  fact  that  in  many  families 
parents  and  children  can  be  together  undisturbed  only  during  the 
night,  in  the  hours  of  sleep.  Even  the  last  chance  of  a  cosey 
hour  together  at  breakfast  and  dinner  is  constantly  destroyed  by 
the  conditions  of  labor  which  I  have  described,  and  which  make 
it  impossible  for  father  and  children  to  go  home  for  their  meals. 
And  even  when  this  can  be  done,  the  hour's  recess  is  only  just 


MISAPPREHENSIONS    CONCERNING   SOCIALISM.     47 

sufficient,  in  my  opinion,  to  make  the  double  journey  —  in  the 
nature  of  things  a  moderately  long  one  for  the  workmen  of  large 
establishments  —  and  to  swallow  the  food  post-haste,  without 
comfort  or  leisure. 

"  I  shall  speak  in  another  place  of  the  effect  of  this  state  of 
things  on  the  morals,  characters,  and  opinions  of  the  wage-earn- 
ing class.  Here  I  have  only  to  state  the  bare  fact  of  the  com- 
plete change  in  character  of  the  workman's  family,  and  the 
causes  which  have  brought  it  about.  I  repeat  that  it  is,  prima- 
rily, a  product  of  our  present  economic  conditions.  These  it  is 
which  must  bear  the  heaviest  burden  of  responsibility,  and  not 
social  democracy,  which,  in  this  respect  as  in  others,  has  but 
drawn  the  ultimate  conclusions  from  existing  premises,  and  form- 
ulated them  into  a  system.  The  present  evils  are  the  ground- 
work and  opportunity  of  social  democracy,  and  its  doctrine  of  the 
ideal  future  family." 

Mr.  Gohre  adds  :  — 

"  We  must  not  be  blind  to  this  fact,  above  all,  those  of  us  who 
represent  the  avowedly  religious  section  of  the  community;  and, 
instead  of  bewailing  the  obvious  decline  of  the  old  Christian  ideal 
of  the  family,  and  inveighing  against  social  democracy,  we  ought 
rather  to  co-operate  in  putting  an  end,  definitely  and  forever,  to 
the  economic  causes  of  which  the  present  situation  is  the  inevi- 
table result." ! 

The  socialist  writer  declares,  then,  that  the  present 
social  order  is  the  cause  of  disintegration  of  the  family, 
and  he  reproaches  it  with  having  destroyed  the  family, 
and  put  nothing  better  in  its  place.  "  This  is  what  you 
are  doing ! "  he  cries  to  the  adherents  of  the  present 
economic  system.2 

The  socialist  claims  that  socialism  will  again  make 

l  See  "Three  Months  a  Factory  Hand,"  by  Paul  Gohre,  translated 
by  A.  B.  Carr,  soon  to  be  published  by  Messrs.  Swan  Sonnenschein 
&  Co.,  London. 

3  "  Das  Erfurter  Programm,"  by  Karl  Kautsky,  chapter  iv. 


48  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

possible  ideal  love.  When  the  author,  some  time  since, 
in  an  article  called  attention  to  the  fact  that  socialism 
did  not  mean  free  love,  and  carried  with  it  no  peculiar 
doctrine  concerning  the  family,  he  received  letters  from 
two  excellent  young  women,  both  Americans  and  so- 
cialists. One  commented  upon  the  passage  in  this 
language : — 

"  Serious  and  intelligent  people  surely  do  not  need  to  be  told 
to-day  that  socialism  has  nothing  to  do  with  free  love  or  atheism, 
and  would,  I  should  think,  resent  being  told  it.  Could  not  you 
mention  the  stigma  briefly,  as  a  thing  of  the  past  and  then 
account  for  it  historically?" 

The  other,  however,  wrote  as  follows  :  — 

"If  socialists  may  speak  for  socialism,  it  certainly  does  en- 
tertain the  notion  that  the  family  of  to-day  belongs  to  the  eco- 
nomic system  of  to-day,  and  that  its  economic  foundation,  that 
is,  the  economic  dependence  of  the  wife  upon  the  husband,  passes 
away  with  the  rest  of  the  economic  dependence  of  one  person 
upon  another." 

What  shall  be  said  in  regard  to  these  two  contradictory 
positions  ?  The  latter  position  is  that  taken  by  those 
who  adhere  to  a  materialistic  conception  of  history, 
which  traces  all  social  relations  to  economic  conditions, 
and  holds  that,  as  the  family  has  changed  in  the  past, 
even  so  it  will  change  in  the  future,  as  underlying  eco- 
nomic conditions  evolve  into  higher  forms.  This  concep- 
tion of  history  is,  however,  no  necessary  part  of  socialism, 
and  no  socialist  has  claimed  that  there  is  anything  higher 
than  the  pure  monogamic  marriage  of  man  and  woman 
resting  upon  love.  Whatever  view  we  take  of  the  evolu- 
tion of  society,  it  would  not  seem  to  follow  of  necessity 
that  socialism  would,  if  successful,  do  anything  more 


MISAPPREHENSIONS   CONCERNING   SOCIALISM.     49 

than  purify  and  elevate  the  family.  The  differences 
among  socialists  in  regard  to  the  binding  character  of 
the  marriage  tie  in  the  absence  of  love,  or  after  it  has 
disappeared,  are  no  greater  than  the  differences  among 
other  men. 


50  SOCIALISM  AND   SOCIAL   REFORM. 


CHAPTER  VI. 
THE    ORIGIN    OP   SOCIALISM. 

MODERN  socialism  is  the  natural  outcome  of  modern 
industrial  conditions,  and  its  origin  is  contemporaneous 
with  the  origin  of  those  conditions.  We  must  seek  its 
beginnings  in  the  beginnings  of  modern  industry.  We 
can  express  this  thought  differently  by  saying  that 
modern  socialism  is  the  product  of  the  industrial  revo- 
lution. It  has  grown  with  this  revolution,  becoming  in- 
ternational as  the  industrial  revolution  has  spread  over 
the  nations  of  the  world.  The  peculiarities  of  socialism 
are  part  and  parcel  of  the  industrial  revolution  itself. 

The  industrial  revolution  was  brought  about  by  the 
series  of  inventions  following  important  geographical 
discoveries.  The  most  important  of  the  inventions 
which  inaugurated  the  industrial  revolution  took  place 
about  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  century,  and  they 
may  be  enumerated  as  follows :  Kay's  fly  shuttle,  in- 
vented in  1738,  the  first  of  the  great  inventions  to  revo- 
lutionize the  weaving  industry  in  England ;  Watt's  steam 
engine,  invented  in  1769,  and  applied  to  the  manufacture 
of  cotton  sixteen  years  later;  John  Hargreave's  spinning- 
jenny,  patented  in  1770 ;  the  water  frame  of  Richard 
Arkwright,  the  barber's  assistant,  invented  in  1769; 
Samuel  Crompton's  mule,  invented  in  1779;  Edward 
Cartwright's  power  loom,  produced  in  1787 ;  and  Eli 
Whitney's  cotton-gin,  invented  in  1793.  These  inventors 


THE  ORIGIN   OF  SOCIALISM.  51 

may,  in  a  sense,  be  called  the  fathers  of  modern  social- 
ism, for  without  their  inventions  it  could  not  have  come 
into  existence. 

The  industrial  revolution  signifies  rapid  changes  in 
the  economic  world.  Evolution  is  going  on  continually, 
but  we  speak  of  changes  as  revolutionary  when  they 
occur  with  such  unusual  rapidity  that  we  are  not  able 
readily  to  adjust  ourselves  to  them.  "What  are  these 
changes  which  have  taken  place  as  a  result  of  the  great 
inventions  named  ?  We  can  perhaps  best  understand 
these  changes,  if  we  look  about  us  and  reflect  upon  those 
things  in  the  economic  world  which  are  new.  We  have 
only  to  go  outside  our  own  homes  and  use  our  eyes  dili- 
gently in  any  great  city,  to  understand  what  it  means 
when  it  is  said  that  our  present  economic  world  is  more 
different  from  that  of  1776  than  the  economic  world  of 
1776  was  from  the  economic  life  of  the  early  Oriental 
monarchies.  Is  it  even  necessary  to  enumerate  these  new 
things  ?  Everyone  calls  to  mind  the  telegraph,  the  rail- 
way, the  telephone,  street-cars,  electric  lights,  anthracite 
coal,  petroleum,  etc.  We  may  take  up  the  factors  in  pro- 
duction —  land,  labor,  capital,  and  enterprise  —  and  trace 
changes  in  each  one,  and  we  shall  find  them  momentous. 
Perhaps  the  changes  have  been  least  important  with  re- 
spect to  land  ;  yet  even  in  land  the  changes  are  not  incon- 
siderable. During  this  period  we  have  witnessed,  first, 
the  contraction  of  public  property  in  land,  and  then,  more 
recently,  the  growth  of  public  property;  and,  what  is 
more  important  still,  it  is  within  this  period  that  it  has 
become  possible  to  buy  and  sell  land  freely  like  com- 
modities, so  that  we  may  almost  say  that  land  itself  has 
become  a  commodity.  Slavery  and  serfdom  have  been 
abolished,  and  labor  has  been  given  the  right  of  free  set- 


52  SOCIALISM  AND   SOCIAL  REFORM. 

tlement  and  contract.  But  it  is  with,  respect  to  capital 
that  the  most  momentous  changes  have  taken  place, 
because  it  is  changes  in  capital  and  the  management  of 
capital  which  have  carried  with  them  the  most  signifi- 
cant changes  in  labor  itself.  The  changes  of  which  we 
have  spoken  with  respect  to  labor  were  necessary  to 
enable  capital  to  do  its  work ;  but  the  chief  change  was 
in  that  force  which  we  call  capital.  Capital,  then,  is 
that  which  is  most  significant  in  the  industrial  revolu- 
tion ;  and  Karl  Marx  showed  his  insight  into  what  was 
essential  when  he  called  his  book  on  socialism,  "  Capital," 
and  those  are  inferior  economists  who  would  concentrate 
attention  on  land  rather  than  on  capital.  Capital,  tak- 
ing advantage  of  the  inventions  in  industry  and  the  im- 
provement of  means  of  communication  and  transportation 
brought  about  by  these  inventions,  was  able  to  extend 
production  and  to  carry  it  on  on  a  scale  of  increasing 
magnitude.  This  production  upon  a  vast  scale,  based 
upon  a  far-reaching  division  of  labor,  became  essentially 
social  production.  Armies  of  men  work  together  in 
single  or  allied  establishments,  each  one  doing  his  own 
small  part  of  a  vast  whole.  Capitalistic  production 
passed  out  of  the  shop  and  entered  the  factory.  The 
master  workman  gave  place  to  the  captain  of  industry, 
and  journeymen  and  apprentices  to  regiments  of  wage- 
earners.  Production  gradually  became  more  and  more 
socialized,  and  the  process  is  still  going  on  to-day. 

Private  property  in  the  instruments  of  production 
came,  in  the  meantime,  to  have  a  new  significance. 
Formerly  private  property  in  the  instruments  of  pro- 
duction meant  private  property  in  the  tools  used  by  the 
worker.  The  master  had  not  a  separate  and  distinct 
income  without  direct  personal  toil;  and  capital  did  not 


THE  ORIGIN  OF  SOCIALISM.  53 

separate  the  industrial  workmen  into  classes.  But  when 
production  became  socialized,  private  property  in  the 
instruments  of  production  meant  a  great  capitalist  who 
110  longer  toiled  at  the  bench  with  his  workmen,  but  one 
who  lived  in  a  different  quarter  of  the  town,  and  often  did 
not  know  them  by  sight.  This  private  property,  in  the 
instruments  of  production,  became  the  source  of  a  large 
income  altogether  separate  and  distinct  from  the  returns 
to  personal  exertion.  Now,  if  we  add  to  all  this  that 
there  has  been  going  on  an  extension  of  political  rights, 
terminating  in  modern  political  democracy  and  increased 
educational  facilities  of  every  sort,  all  resulting  in  larger 
demands  on  the  part  of  the  less  favored  members  of  the 
community,  particularly  those  ordinarily  designated  as 
the  lower  classes,  and  the  growing  self-consciousness  on 
their  part,  as  the  result  of  their  separation  from  their 
employers,  have  we  not  given  the  conditions  which  must 
inevitably  result  in  socialistic  thought  ? 

We  have,  as  the  consequence  of  the  industrial  revolu- 
tion, enormously  increased  the  production  of  wealth,  and 
that  production  is  social,  and  not  individual.  What 
could  more  readily  suggest  itself  than  the  socialization 
of  the  instruments  of  production,  to  correspond  with  the 
socialization  of  production  on  the  one  hand,  and  political 
democracy  on  the  other  ?  It  was  something  so  obvious 
that  the  workers  could  not  help  demanding  sooner  or 
later  that  they  should  have  control  of  industry,  as  they 
were  acquiring  control  of  politics ;  and  that  they  should 
have  the  advantages  resulting  from  the  ownership  of  the 
instruments  of  production  which  they  used,  but  which 
advantages  they  saw  now  accruing  to  a  distinct  class ; 
namely,  the  capitalist  class.  "To  the  workers  the 
tools!"  became  the  rallying  cry,  which,  once  uttered, 


54  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

was  rapidly  taken  up,  and  could  not  cease  to  be  echoed 
and  re-echoed.  The  increased  production  of  wealth 
could  not,  withal,  fail  to  stimulate  desire  on  the  part  of 
those  who  participated  in  that  production.  They  could 
not  see  why  a  larger  part  of  the  advantages  of  increased 
production  should  not  accrue  to  them.  They  used  tools 
and  machines  which  frequently  multiplied  their  labor- 
power  a  hundred  and  a  thousand  fold;  but  they  could 
not  be  brought  to  believe  that  there  was  any  correspond- 
ing improvement  in  their  own  condition.  It  was  not 
necessary  to  point  this  out  to  the  toilers,  for  they  could 
not  help  feeling  it  themselves.  But  when  deep  thinkers 
arose  and  formulated  a  system  of  industry  which,  once 
introduced,  would  give  to  the  workers  all  the  results  of 
the  increased  productivity  of  labor,  they  were  predis- 
posed to  favor  this  system,  and  to  take  up  an  agitation  in 
favor  of  the  overthrow  of  the  existing  system,  and  the 
substitution  therefor  of  the  new  industrial  order. 

But  this  is  not  all.  It  has  been  said  that  socialism 
grew  and  developed  with  the  growth  and  development  of 
the  industrial  revolution.  Early  in  this  century  social- 
ists proposed  the  establisment  of  small  independent 
communistic  societies.  Each  little  village  or  hamlet  was 
to  be  voluntarily  organized,  and  to  be  relatively  self- 
sufficient.  The  idea  was  that  of  a  large  household  of 
equals  working  together  as  brothers  and  sisters,  and 
producing  the  things  which  they  needed  for  their  own 
consumption.  As  industry  became  national,  and  then  in- 
ternational, in  its  scope,  solidarity  of  interests  grew  like- 
wise. Workingmen's  organizations  extended  from  city 
to  city,  and  from  nation  to  nation,  and  then  to  the  whole 
civilized  world.  Their  ideals  grew  fast,  and,  wishing  to 
enjoy  the  fruits  of  modern  inventions  and  modern  indus- 


THE  ORIGIN  OF  SOCIALISM.  55 

trial  processes,  their  socialism  expanded  from  the  village 
community  to  the  nation,  and  then  to  the  world.  Social- 
ism itself,  then,  passed  through  three  stages.  It  was 
first  local,  then  national,  and  finally  cosmopolitan.  The 
local  communistic  settlement  formed  on  a  voluntary  basis 
cannot  enter  into  the  advantages  of  a  modern  industry, 
and,  from  the  standpoint  of  modern  socialism,  is  held  to 
be  an  anachronism.  Yet  another  reflection  is  obvious. 
Industrial  conditions  are  similar  in  all  parts  of  the  world 
which  have  participated  in  the  industrial  revolution. 
These  similar  conditions  must  inevitably  give  rise  to 
similar  thought.  Socialism  is  not  the  only  possible  con- 
clusion which  can  be  drawn  from  them,  but  it  is  the  one 
which  could  not  fail  to  be  drawn ;  and  the  absurdity  of 
the  ordinary  talk  about  the  importation  of  socialism  from 
a  foreign  land  becomes  apparent. 


56  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 


CHAPTER  VII. 
THE   PROGRESS    OP    SOCIALISM. 

DID  we  need  any  justification  for  the  attention  which 
we  give  to  socialism,  it  could  be  easily  found  in  the 
progress  which  it  has  been  making  during  the  past  gen- 
eration. There  existed  early  in  the  century  a  socialism 
of  a  Utopian  type  in  France,  England,  and  Germany. 
France,  in  particular,  had  a  number  of  thinkers  who 
gained  a  great  reputation  at  home  and  abroad,  and  found 
followers  in  many  lands.  Cabet,  Saint-Simon,  and  Fou- 
rier are  names  which,  in  this  connection,  occur  to  every 
one  who  is  at  all  familiar  with  the  history  of  socialism. 
They  had  schemes  more  or  less  fantastic,  but,  withal,  not 
devoid  of  keen  criticism  of  the  existing  order,  and  shrewd 
proposals  for  its  improvement.  England  had  its  Robert 
Owen,  a  wealthy  manufacturer,  who  used  up  a  fortune 
in  endeavors  to  establish  communistic  villages  in  Eng- 
land and  America.  The  United  States  had  its  wave  of 
Fourieristic  socialism,  and  its  Brook  Farm  and  other  set- 
tlements. Albert  Brisbane,  Horace  Greeley,  and  George 
William  Curtis,  among  other  distinguished  Americans, 
took  part  in  the  movement.  About  18GO  this  early  social- 
ism had  well-nigh  disappeared,  or  been  absorbed  by  other 
socialistic  movements.  The  co-operative  movement  in 
England,  for  example,  took  up  the  energy  which  had 
gone  into  Robert  Owen's  socialism,  and  its  only  outcome 
for  a  time  seemed  to  be  the  peaceful  operations  of  the 


THE  PROGRESS   OF  SOCIALISM.  57 

co-operative  store.  Louis  Blanc  had  before  this  time 
begun  an  agitation  more  national  in  scope,  and  proposed 
to  use  the  power  of  the  state  for  the  transformation  of 
the  modern  competitive  system  into  socialism.  But  Louis 
Blanc  and  his  proposals  appeared  to  be  overwhelmed  in 
the  disasters  of  the  Revolution  of  1848.  It  was  not 
strange,  then,  that  a  French  writer  about  1865  felt  like 
offering  an  apology  for  compliance  with  a  request  to  fur- 
nish an  article  on  socialism  for  an  encyclopedia  of  polit- 
ical science.  Socialism,  he  said  in  effect,  is  something 
which  is  now  dead  and  gone;  but,  after  all,  it  has  curious 
historical  interest  which  may  justify  the  present  article. 
Scarcely  was  the  ink  dry  on  his  manuscript,  however, 
before  the  world  began  to  hear  something  of  a  German 
named  Ferdinand  Lassalle.  Fascinating  in  manner, 
admired  alike  by  men  and  women,  fiery  and  eloquent, 
he  soon  -began  to  rally  about  him  the  workingmen  of 
Germany.  The  newspapers  said  that  socialism  could 
not  get  a  foothold  in  Germany.  Socialism  was  some- 
thing, it  was  urged,  which  might  appeal  to  the  restless 
Frenchman,  but  could  make  no  headway  against  the 
solid  common  sense  and  contentment  of  the  educated, 
but  patient,  German  toiler.  Ferdinand  Lassalle  was 
undoubtedly  drawing  his  materials  in  part  from  the  ar- 
mory of  Louis  Blanc,  and  it  was  natural  that  socialism 
should  be  said  to  be  a  foreign  importation,  and  not  some- 
thing which  could  naturally  appeal  to  Germans.  Yet 
the  impossible  happened.  Ferdinand  Lassalle  died  a 
romantic  death,  but  his  followers  revered  his  memory 
and  took  up  his  work. 

In  the  meantime  there  had  come  into  Germany  an 
influence  proceeding  from  Karl  Marx  and  Friedrich 
Engels,  then  living  in  London,  but  native  Germans,  who 


58  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

had  become  involved  in  the  revolutionary  troubles  of 
1848,  and  had  been  obliged  to  flee  their  fatherland.  The 
socialism  of  Lassalle  was  more  distinctively  national  in 
character,  while  this  new  influence  was  more  cosmopol- 
itan, and  less  inclined  to  operate  upon  a  strictly  national 
basis.  Quarrels  and  dissensions  between  the  factions 
were  a  source  of  satisfaction  to  the  enemies  of  German 
socialism,  but  soon  they  united,  and  since  then  they  have 
worked  together.  The  progress  of  socialism  in  Germany 
has  been  almost  uninterrupted  from  the  beginning,  and 
has  been  entirely  without  parallel  in  such  radical  social 
movements.  This  progress  has  taken  place  in  spite  of 
opposition  of  all  sorts,  both  private  and  public.  Laws  of 
Draconian  severity  passed  against  the  social  democracy, 
and  enforced  relentlessly,  have  served  only  to  strengthen 
and  unite  the  party.  The  social  democrats  returned 
eight  members  to  the  parliament  of  the  North  German 
Federation  in  1867.  At  the  first  election  after  the  for- 
mation of  the  German  Empire  they  returned  two  mem- 
bers and  cast  nearly  125,000  votes.  The  votes  increased 
to  nearly  500,000  in  1877,  when  the  number  of  seats  in 
parliament  gained  by  the  party  was  twelve.  Owing  to 
an  attempt  on  the  life  of  the  German  Emperor,  a  slight 
reaction  took  place  in  1878,  the  party  losing  some  50,000 
votes  and  three  seats  in  parliament.  At  the  next  election 
the  social  democrats  suffered  under  the  influence  of  the 
special  laws  passed  against  them,  and  lost  over  100,000 
votes,  although  they  gained  three  seats  in  parliament,  as 
their  votes  were  so  concentrated  that  they  were  more 
effective.  From  that  time  until  the  present,  the  number 
of  votes  cast  by  the  social  democrats  has  increased  with- 
out interruption,  and  in  1890  they  became  numerically 
the  strongest  party  in  the  empire,  casting  nearly  1,500,000 


THE  PROGRESS  OF  SOCIALISM.  59 

votes.  They  retained  their  position  as  the  strongest  party 
in  the  empire  in  the  elections  of  1893,  casting  nearly 
1,800,000  votes,  and  electing  forty-four  members  of  par- 
liament, a  far  smaller  number  than  proportional  repre- 
.  sentation  would  give  them,  as  their  votes  were  more 
scattered  than  those  of  the  other  parties.1 

Of  course  this  means  less  than  it  would  in  a  country 
like  the  United  States  or  England,  because  there  are 
a  dozen  or  more  political  parties  in  Germany.  Another 
indication  of  the  growth  of  social  democracy,  is  the  fact 
that  it  has  gained  a  foothold  among  the  students  of 
the  universities,  and  that  there  are  formal  social  demo- 
cratic organizations  in  several  important  German  univer- 
sities. These  students  held  a  meeting  to  discuss  their 
plans  for  pushing  social  democracy,  in  Geneva,  Switzer- 
land, in  December,  1893. 

Next  to  Germany,  England  is  probably  the  country 
where  socialism  is  strongest.  It  has  not  made  itself  felt 
to  a  great  -extent  as  a  separate  political  party,  but  has 
influenced  all  the  parties,  and  is  producing  a  powerful 
impression  upon  the  thought  and  legislation  of  England. 
It  has  participated  in  local  elections,  and  its  candidates 
have  been  successful  in  many  instances.  London  is  not 
only  the  greatest  city  in  England,  but  the  greatest  city  in 
the  world ;  and  it  is  governed  by  a  County  Council,  the 
majority  of  whose  members,  if  not  avowed  socialists,  at 
any  rate  act  consciously  under  a  pronounced  socialist 
influence.  Socialistic  thought  is  a  force  which  to-day  is 
governing  London,  although,  of  course,  it  must  be  re- 
membered that  London  alone  is  so  restricted  by  national 

1  See  Appendix  for  full  statistics  showing  the  progress  of  German 
social  democracy.  A  chart  is  also  added,  giving  a  graphic  represen- 
tation of  the  advance  social  democracy  has  made. 


60  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

legislation,  that  it  cannot  carry  out  anything  like  a  full 
socialist  program.  Yet  the  drift  is  unmistakable.  Two 
illustrations  will  suffice.  The  London  County  Council 
has  recently  acquired  some  twenty-one  miles  of  street 
railways  (tramways),  and  proposes  to  operate  these  lines. 
While  the  ownership  and  operation  of  municipal  mo- 
nopolies does  not,  of  necessity,  mean  socialism,  —  while, 
indeed,  an  anti-socialist  may  favor  such  ownership  and 
operation,  —  the  significant  point  is  that  in  London  the 
change  was  brought  about  by  socialist  intent,  and  as 
part  of  a  socialist  program.  The  second  illustration  is 
found  in  the  abolition  of  the  contract  system  in  the  con- 
struction of  artisans'  dwellings  by  the  municipality. 
The  municipality  has  had  for  some  time  the  power  to 
erect  dwellings  for  artisans,  but  it  had  been  in  the  habit 
of  employing  contractors  in  its  operations.  The  aboli- 
tion of  the  contract  system  means  a  determination  on 
the  part  of  the  municipality  to  organize  and  carry  on  the 
work  itself ;  and  this  change  is  also  effected  because  it  is 
in  the  direction  of  socialism. 

Perhaps  equally  important  has  been  the  changed  atti- 
tude of  the  English  workingmen.  The  newspapers  of 
England  indulged  in  talk  concerning  the  relations  of 
English  workingmen  to  socialism,  precisely  like  that 
found  at  an  earlier  date  in  the  German  newspapers 
respecting  the  relations  of  German  workingmen  to  social- 
ism. Socialism,  it  was  alleged,  was  a  Continental  poi- 
son which  could  not  make  headway  in  England.  Its 
workingmen  were  too  prosperous,  it  was  alleged,  and, 
moreover,  they  were  too  little  inclined  to  indulge  in 
philosophical  speculation  to  follow  the  vague  and  in- 
definite ideas  looking  to  a  remote  future  prosperity. 
England,  it  was  claimed,  was  the  classic  land  of  common 


THE  PROGRESS   OF  SOCIALISM.  61 

sense.  The  English  trades  unions,  once  dreaded,  now 
began  to  receive  praise,  and  were  looked  upon  as  bul- 
warks of  conservatism.  For  some  time,  indeed,  they 
seemed  to  merit  the  praise  which  was  meted  out  to 
them;  but  more  and  more  they  have  fallen  under  the 
influence  of  socialistic  thought,  and  at  the  last  trades 
union  congress,  held  at  Belfast  in  September,  1893,  a 
program  for  political  action  was  adopted  which  was 
nothing  less  than  pure  socialism.  A  motion  requiring 
candidates  for  Parliament  receiving  financial  assistance 
to  pledge  themselves  "  to  support  the  principle  of  collect- 
ive ownership  and  control  of  all  the  means  of  produc- 
tion and  distribution,"  was  carried  by  a  large  majority. 
Moreover,  an  Independent  Labor  Party  was  formed  in 
January,  1893 ;  and  its  object,  as  stated  in  the  constitu- 
tion as  amended  in  February,  1894,  is  "The  collective 
ownership  and  control  of  the  means  of  production,  dis- 
tribution, and  exchange."  Its  president  is  Mr.  Kier 
Hardie,  M.P. 

Modern  socialism  has  required  time  to  gain  a  firm 
foothold  in  France.  Early  Utopian  socialism  was  practi- 
cally dead  in  1860.  During  the  last  decade  of  Napo- 
leon's reign  there  was  no  strong  socialistic  movement, 
although  the  International  Workingmen's  Association 
made  itself  known  and  felt  in  France.  The  uprising  of 
the  Paris  Commune  was  only  partially  socialistic.  It 
was  only  during  the  latter  part  of  its  history  that  the 
socialistic  elements  began  to  make  themselves  promi- 
nent. But  this  uprising  was  suppressed,  and  a  frightful 
slaughter  of  the  masses  ensued,  in  which  it  is  said  that 
the  larger  proportion  of  the  revolutionary  population 
was  slain.  Socialism  did  not  play  any  role  in  the  early 
history  of  the  republic,  and  severe  laws  sought  to  sup- 


62  SOCIALISM  AND   SOCIAL  REFORM. 

press  it.  Many  conditions,  moreover,  were  unfavorable 
to  the  growth  of  socialism.  One  of  these  was  the  gener- 
ally unsettled  condition  of  society  following  upon  the 
revolutionary  movement.  Troubled  times  are  more  fa- 
vorable to  schemes  for  a  violent  overthrow  of  existing 
institutions  than  to  the  development  of  organized  and 
systematic  efforts  at  a  gradual  and  peaceful  reconstruc- 
tion of  society.  It  may  be  said  in  a  general  way  that 
social  tranquillity  is  favorable  to  socialism,  and  a  politi- 
cally unsettled  condition  is  favorable  to  anarchy.  More- 
over, for  a  time,  the  character  of  the  French  masses  did 
not  seem  to  be  sufficiently  stable  and  thoughtful  to  fur- 
nish a  good  soil  for  socialism.  It  appeared  to  be  more 
receptive  to  the  propaganda  of  revolutionary  violence, 
and  to  schemes  for  the  overthrow  of  the  existing  system 
and  the  establishment  of  a  new  order  in  a  night.  The 
continued  existence  of  the  republic  has  given  France  a 
longer  period  of  domestic  peace  than  she  has  known 
since  the  great  revolution  of  the  last  century,  and  the 
marvellous  development  of  educational  institutions  in 
France  has  furnished  a  better  instructed  people  as  a  soil 
for  a  social  philosophy,  which  at  least  requires  some  con- 
siderable intellectual  capacity  and  effort  for  its  compre- 
hension. A  group  of  students  began  the  publication  of 
a  socialistic  paper  in  1876 ;  and  Jules  Guesde,  who  at  one 
time  had  been  inclined  to  favor  anarchy,  but  had  become 
a  socialist,  founded  a  "  collectivistic "  labor  party  in 
1879.  Collectivism,  it  may  be  remarked  in  passing,  is  a 
designation  of  socialism  which  is  common  in  France. 
Shortly  afterward,  another  convert  from  anarchy,  Dr. 
Paul  Brousse,  joined  Guesde.  It  may  be  said  that 
by  1880  modern  socialism  had  gained  a  firm  foothold  in 
France.  The  development  was  slow  for  a  time,  and  in 


THE  PROGRESS  OF  SOCIALISM.  63 

1889  the  socialists  cast  only  91,000  votes  out  of  a  total 
of  6,847,000,  or  1.30  per  cent.  Two  years  later,  however, 
they  cast  549,000  out  of  a  total  of  6,275,000  votes,  that 
is  to  say,  nearly  nine  per  cent.1  But  it  was  in  1893  that 
France  was  astonished  by  the  success  of  the  socialists  in 
the  election  for  members  of  the  French  Assembly.  In 
that  year  they  succeeded  in  increasing  the  number  of 
their  deputies  from  fifteen  to  fifty,  becoming  thus,  as  in 
Germany,  a  great  political  party.  They  have  become  so 
strong  that  they  do  not  seem  to  have  been  injured  by 
the  tendency  to  reaction  necessarily  following  upon  the 
explosion  of  the  dynamite  bomb  thrown  among  the 
French  deputies  by  the  recently  executed  anarchist,  Vail- 
lant,  and  the  attempts  to  make  the  people  of  France 
regard  the  socialists  as  responsible  appear  to  have  been 
fruitless.  This  unquestionably  means  a  great  deal. 

It  is  also  significant  that  Paris,  the  seconS.  city  of  the 
world  in  size,  is,  like  London,  under  the  government  of  a 
socialist  municipal  council,  and  that  some  five  or  six 
other  French  cities  are  governed  by  municipal  councils, 
the  majority  of  whose  members  are  either  avowed  social- 
ists or  are  socialistically  inclined. 

The  students  of  France,  like  those  of  Germany,  seem 
to  be  more  or  less  receptive  to  socialism ;  for  a  socialistic 
society  was  formed  in  the  student  quarter,  the  well- 
known  Latin  Quarter,  of  Paris  in  1891,  and  it  seems  to 
have  displayed  considerable  activity  since  that  time.2 

An  essential  feature  of  the  growth  of  socialism  in 
France  is  the  development  of  what  we  may,  relatively  at 
least,  designate  as  conservatism.  It  is  probably  on  this 

1  "Der  Capitalismus  fin  de  siccle,**  by  Rudolph  Meyer,  p.  477. 

2  See  Appendix  for  a  statement  concerning  the  present  condition 
Of  socialism  iu  France. 


64  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

account,  as  well  as  on  account  of  greater  familiarity  with 
socialist  plans,  that  socialism  appears  to  be  less  dreaded 
now  than  formerly.  The  author  of  the  report  on  France 
issued  by  the  English  Royal  Commission  on  Labor  de- 
scribes the  change  in  public  opinion  in  these  words :  — 

"Whatever  may  have  been  the  meaning  originally  attached  in 
France  to  the  word  socialism,  and  whatever  may  be  the  precise 
body  of  doctrine  to  which  it  may  be  applied  at  the  present  time, 
it  is  certain,  as  a  writer  in  the  Revue  Des  deux  Mondea  in  1890 
pointed  out,  that  it  has  lost  part  of  the  significance  of  something 
4  violent  and  somewhat  offensive  that  it  had  formerly.'  All  par- 
ties alike  in  France  are  agreed  as  to  the  fact  of  the  change."  l 

The  other  European  countries  require  less  attention. 
Modern  socialism  began  to  make  itself  felt  in  Belgium 
in  1876,  when  Dr.  Cesar  de  Paepe,  a  former  anarchist, 
who  had  become  an  adherent  of  Karl  Marx,  began  an 
agitation  among  the  workingmen  of  that  country,  and 
established  a  social  democratic  party,  at  first  containing 
two  factions,  which  united  in  1879  and  formed  a  political 
socialistic  party,  with  a  program  much  like  that  of  the 
German  social  democracy.  Socialism  in  Belgium  has 
been  connected  with  remarkable  co-operative  societies 
which  have  achieved  a  rare  success,  and  at  the  same  time 
have  been  used  as  centres  of  socialistic  activity.  The 
two  best  known  of  these  are  the  Vooruit  of  Ghent  and 
the  Volkshaus  of  Brussels.  The  suffrage  has  heretofore 
been  so  restricted  in  Belgium  that  it  has  been  confined 
to  persons  of  wealth,  and  the  wage-earners  have  had  no 
chance  to  make  themselves  felt  in  politics.  But  during 
the  past  year  the  socialists  began  a  tremendous  agita- 

1  Eoyal  Commission  on  Labour's  Foreign  Reports,  vol.  vi.,  France, 
London,  1893,  p.  10. 


THE  PROGRESS   OF  SOCIALISM.  65 

tion  to  secure  universal  suffrage,  and  developed  one  of 
the  most  remarkable  agitations  of  modern  times.  They 
threatened  a  universal  strike,  and  so  alarmed  the  public 
authorities  that  something  approximating  universal  suf- 
frage was  established.  It  remains  to  be  seen  what  use 
socialism  will  make  of  this  new  condition  of  things  in 
Belgium. 

Holland  has  not  been  so  prominent  in  modern  social- 
ism as  Belgium ;  but  it  has  an  educated  and  able  leader 
in  Domela-Nieuwenhuis,  and  of  late  there  seems  to  have 
been  indications  of  at  least  a  moderate  growth  of  social- 
ism in  Holland.  In  1893  the  socialists  gained  control 
for  the  first  time  of  the  municipal  council  of  a  Dutch 
city,  namely  Beesterzwaag,  in  which  they  have  eight 
out  of  fifteen  municipal  councillors.1 

Of  the  Scandinavian  countries,  Denmark  and  Sweden 
alone  have  displayed  any  considerable  socialistic  activ- 
ity, although  socialism  has  made  some  little  progress  in 
Norway,  where,  however,  the  backward  industrial  con- 
dition has  been  unfavorable  to  its  growth.  The  Danish 
socialists  after  various  reverses  became  strong  in  the 
eighties,  and  they  have  succeeded  in  gaining  a  following 
among  the  agricultural  laborers,  as  well  as  among  the 
artisans  of  the  towns.  Their  principal  organ,  Social- 
Demokraten,  has  a  large  circulation,  and,  according  to 
the  last  account  accessible  to  the  author,  they  have  four 
members  in  the  Bigsdag,  namely,  two  each  in  the  Folke- 
thing  and  the  Landsthing.  Socialism  has,  during  the 
same  period,  made  considerable,  but  less,  advance  in 
Sweden,  where  it  has  a  strong  central  organ,  also  called 
Social-  Demokraten. 

Socialism  has  developed  slowly  in  Austria,  where  it 
1  See  the  Revue  Sqcialiste  for  September,  1893. 


66  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

has  had  to  contend  against  anarchy ;  but  of  late,  under 
the  leadership  of  Dr.  Victor  Adler,  an  adherent  of  Marx, 
it  has  become  stronger.  Although  Austrian  socialism 
is  still  weakened  by  dissensions  and  by  anarchy,  it  is 
claimed  that  the  labor  movement  in  this  country  is  essen- 
tially social-democratic.  Socialism  undoubtedly  begins 
to  be  felt  as  a  force  in  Austria,  although  far  weaker 
than  in  France,  Germany,  or  England. 

Switzerland  is  politically  the  most  democratic  country 
in  the  world.  It  is  certainly  far  more  democratic  than 
the  United  States,  and  it  is  a  country  in  which  social 
reform  has  proceeded  more  rapidly  than  in  any  other 
country,  unless  it  may  possibly  be  England.  Switzer- 
land has  been  the  home  also  of  foreign  agitators  and 
socialists  from  all  parts  of  the  world;  and  yet  pure 
socialism,  while  it  doubtless  has  its  adherents,  has  never 
become  a  very  prominent  political  factor.  It  seems  that 
social  and  political  reforms  which  are  within  the  reach 
of  the  people  have,  in  the  main,  absorbed  their  energy, 
and  diverted  into  peaceful  channels  the  social  current 
which  in  other  countries  has  become  revolutionary. 

The  Latin  countries  generally  have  furnished  a  less 
favorable  soil  for  socialism  than  the  Teutonic  countries. 
The  masses  have  been  more  ignorant,  and,  on  account  of 
their  temperament  perhaps,  more  receptive  to  a  propa- 
ganda of  anarchistic  violence  than  to  socialistic  philoso- 
phy. It  is  generally,  if  not  universally,  found  that  where 
socialism  is  strong,  anarchy  is  weak ;  and  where  anarchy 
flourishes,  socialism  languishes.  Socialism  has,  however, 
at  last  gained  a  footing  among  the  agricultural  laborers 
and  the  artisans  of  the  towns  in  Italy ;  and  in  1892  a 
program  was  drawn  up  which  resembles,  in  the  main, 
the  programs  of  the  other  countries  mentioned.  Of 


THE  PROGRESS  OF  SOCIALISM.  67 

twenty-five  socialistic  candidates  who  stood  for  parlia- 
ment in  this  year,  four  or  five  were  elected;  and  in  the 
local  elections  of  1893  several  socialist  candidates  were 
successful,  the  party  finding  support  in  all  parts  of  the 
kingdom.  The  socialist  press  is  reported  to  be  in  a  flour- 
ishing condition,  and  it  includes  a  scientific  review  called 
La  Critica  Sociale.1 

Socialism  has  made  itself  felt  in  Spain  and  Portugal, 
in  the  former  of  which  countries  it  gained  its  first  polit- 
ical success  in  1891,  when  five  socialists  were  elected 
to  local  legislative  bodies  in  the  northern  part  of  the 
country;  four  of  them  being  elected  to  membership  in 
the  municipal  council  of  Bilbao.  Socialism  has,  how- 
ever, in  these  countries,  gained  no  great  strength,  although 
apparently  growing  in  both. 

Russia  has  been  the  natural  home  of  a  propaganda  of 
violent  social  reconstruction,  and  this  has  been  the  natu- 
ral outcome  of  the  impossibility  of  popular  agitation  and 
participation  in  political  life.  The  political  despotism 
of  Russia  seemed  to  lend  countenance  to  the  idea  that 
what  was  first  of  all  needed  was  a  violent  overthrow  of 
existing  institutions.  But  of  late  there  seems  to  be  in 
progress  a  socialistic  agitation  in  Russia  which  seeks  to 
influence  the  industrial  population  of  the  cities.  It  is 
not  surprising  to  be  told  that  the  leaders  of  Russian 
socialism  live  in  foreign  countries. 

Socialism  is  known  and  is  working  elsewhere  in 
Europe,  but  has  not  become  a  great  force.  The  coun- 
tries to  which  reference  is  made  are  those  in  the  southern 
portion  of  Europe  which  are  more  or  less  Asiatic  in  their 


1  Cf.  Report  of   the  Royal   Labour  Commission  on  the  Labour 
Question  in  Italy,  London,  1893,  p.  21. 


68  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL   REFORM. 

characteristics,  and  in  which  the  industrial  development 
has  been  slow.1 

What  shall  be  said  about  socialism  in  the  United 
States?  The  earlier  socialism  was  destroyed  by  our 
Civil  War ;  but  soon  after  that  ceased,  foreigners,  coming 
to  this  country  from  France  and  Germany,  endeavored 
to  plant  the  seeds  of  socialism  in  our  wage-earning  popu- 
lation. The  socialists  of  Germany  established  the  Social- 
istic Labor  Party  in  the  seventies,  and  this  continues  to 
the  present  day.  It  early  entered  into  political  life,  and 
has  in  recent  years  been  active  in  several  parts  of  the 
country,  putting  up  a  presidential  candidate  at  the  last 
election.  The  number  of  votes  cast  for  the  candidates  of 
the  Socialistic  Labor  Party  has  recently  increased  consid- 
erably, and  yet  the  number  is  so  small  as  in  itself  to  have 
no  significance.  The  leaders  of  the  party,  however,  ex- 
press themselves  as  hopeful,  and  believe  that  now  they 
have  gained  a  firm  foothold,  from  which  they  cannot  be 
dislodged.  Early  adherents  were  won  among  the  for- 
eign population,  but  of  late  they  have  made  more  head- 
way among  the  American-born  wage-earning  population. 
They  have  also  exercised  more  influence  than  would 
at  first  appear,  because  they  have  given  a  socialistic  di- 
rection to  the  thought  of  the  labor  leaders  of  the  country. 
Their  adherents  enter  into  the  labor  organizations,  and 
edit  labor  papers  which  are  not  avowedly  socialistic,  and 
yet  advocate  what  is  essentially  socialism.  What  this 
party  may  do  in  the  future  is,  of  course,  uncertain;  but 
it  cannot  be  granted  that,  up  to  the  present  moment,  they 

1  In  regard  to  the  present  condition  of  socialism  in  these  countries, 
see  the  excellent  article  on  Sozialdemokratie,  by  Georg  Adler,  in  the 
Handworterbuch  der  Staatswissenschaften,  edited  by  Prof.  J.  Conrad 
and  others. 


THE  PROGRESS  OF  SOCIALISM.  69 

have  exercised  a  strong  influence,  likely  to  have  a  lasting 
effect  on  the  country. 

Mr.  Edward  Bellamy  wrote  "  Looking  Backward  "  in 
1888.  This  socialistic  work  soon  attained  an  enormous 
circulation,  selling  for  a  time  at  the  rate  of  a  thousand 
copies  a  day.  This  was  the  beginning  of  the  American 
socialism  which  has  been  called  nationalism.  National- 
ist clubs  were  started  in  all  parts  of  the  country,  from 
Boston  to  San  Francisco.  Newspapers  in  the  interest  of 
the  agitation  .sprang  up  almost  daily ;  and  the  leaders 
hoped  in  a  few  years  to  carry  everything  before  them. 
The  movement,  as  a  separate  and  distinct  force,  began  to 
grow  weaker  some  two  years  since,  and  has  seemed  to 
decline  almost  as  rapidly  as  it  rose.  Nationalism  has, 
however,  exercised  a  great  influence  upon  American 
thought,  and  has  not  been  without  effect  upon  legisla- 
tion, particularly  in  Massachusetts,  for  important  laws 
can  be  traced  to  the  agitation  of  the  nationalists.  They 
have  very  generally  entered  into  the  Populist  move- 
ment, not  because  they  accept  that  in  its  present  form 
as  ideal,  but  because  that  movement  has  seemed  to  give 
them  the  best  opportunity  for  the  diffusion  of  their  prin- 
ciples ;  and  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  they  have  given 
a  socialistic  bias  to  this  movement.  They  have  also 
influenced  the  labor  movement,  and,  with  the  Socialistic 
Labor  Party,  they  have  succeeded  in  producing  a  strong 
sentiment  in  favor  of  independent  political  action  on 
the  part  of  wage-earners.  Especially  noteworthy  was  the 
platform  for  independent  political  action  offered  at  the 
meeting  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  in  Chicago 
in  December,  1393.  That  platform  was  referred  to  the 
bodies  represented  for  consideration,  with  the  under- 
standing that  it  would  come  up  for  action  at  the  next 


70  SOCIALISM  AND   SOCIAL   REFORM. 

annual  meeting  of  the  Federation,  which  is  the  largest 
labor  organization  in  the  United  States.  The  president 
of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor,  Mr.  Samuel  Gom- 
pers,  has,  in  the  meantime,  expressed  the  opinion  that 
independent  political  action  was  likely  to  be  taken  at  an 
early  day,  and  that  it  would  be  along  the  lines  of  this 
platform,  which  reads  as  follows  :  — 

POLITICAL,   PKOGRAM. 

Whereas,  The  trade  unionists  of  Great  Britain  have,  by  the  light 
of  experience  and  the  logic  of  progress,  adopted  the  principle 
of  independent  labor  politics  as  an  auxiliary  to  their  economic 
action,  and 

Whereas,  Such  action  has  resulted  in  the  most  gratifying  success, 
and 

Whereas,  Such  independent  labor  politics  are  based  upon  the' 
following  program,  to  wit:  — 

1.  Compulsory  education. 

2.  Direct  legislation. 

3.  A  legal  eight-hour  work-day. 

4.  Sanitary  inspection  of  workshop,  mine,  and  home. 

5.  Liability  of  employers  for  injury  to  health,  body,  or  life. 

6.  The  abolition  of  the  contract  system  in  all  public  work. 

7.  The  abolition  of  the  sweating  system. 

8.  The  municipal  ownership  of  street  cars,  and  gas  and 

electric  plants  for  public  distribution  of  light,  heat, 
and  power. 

9.  The  nationalization  of  telegraphs,  telephones,  railroads, 

and  mines. 

10.  The  collective  ownership  by  the  people  of  all  means  of 

production  and  distribution. 

11.  The  principal  of  the  referendum  in  all  legislation. 

Therefore,  Resolved,  That  this  convention  hereby  indorses  this 
political  action  of  our  British  comrades,  and 


THE  PROGRESS  OF  SOCIALISM.  71 

Resolved,  That  this  program  and  basis  of  a  political  labor 
movement  be,  and  is  hereby,  submitted  for  the  consideration  of 
the  labor  organizations  of  America,  with  the  request  that  their 
delegates  to  the  next  annual  convention  of  the  American  Federa- 
tion of  Labor  be  instructed  on  this  most  important  subject. 

* 

Nationalism  has  influenced  far  more  considerably  than 

the  socialistic  labor  party  the  professional  classes  of  the 
country,  and  particularly  the  clergy. 

It  must  be  stated,  in  conclusion,  that  it  is  extremely 
difficult  to  estimate  precisely  what  strength  socialism  has 
in  the  United  States  at  the  present  time.  The  opinions 
of  observers  will  differ  according  to  their  wishes  with 
respect  to  the  growth  of  socialism.  Nevertheless,  no 
thoughtful  and  impartial  person  can  fail  to  acknowledge 
that  socialism  has,  in  the  United  States,  become  a  force 
which  is  more  likely  to  increase  in  strength  than  to  de- 
crease, and  one  which  cannot  be  ignored,  but  one  with 
which  we  must  deal. 

It  is  not  consistent  with  the  purpose  of  this  book  to  go 
into  details  in  regard  to  socialism  in  every  part  of  the 
world,  as  Australia  and  Canada.  But  we  may  say  that 
socialism  is  known  wherever  modern  industrial  civili- 
zation exists.  It  is  one  expression  of  this  industrial 
civilization  ;  not  the  only  one  to  be  sure.  It  is  an  inter- 
pretation of  this  industrial  civilization  which  may  not  be 
correct,  but  which  was  nevertheless  inevitable.  • 

Socialists  themselves  like  to  compare  the  growth  of 
socialism  to  that  of  Christianity  in  its  early  stages.  Dif- 
ferent as  are  the  two,  the  comparison  is  not  altogether 
inappropriate.  Both  have  found  their  chief  strength 
among  the  masses,  and  they  have  grown  with  marvellous 
rapidity,  although  the  growth  of  socialism,  it  must  be 
confessed,  has  been  the  more  rapid.  They  have  both 


72  SOCIALISM  AND    SOCIAL  KEFORM. 

spread  from  nation  to  nation,  and  been  international  and 
cosmopolitan  in  character.  They  both  demand  universal 
dominion,  and  their  progress  has  not  been  stopped  by 
persecution.  On  the  contrary,  imprisonment  and  death 
seem  to  give  new  zeal  to  their  adherents.  Socialism  has 
become,  as  well  as  Christianity,  a  religion  to  many,  and 
the  devotion  which  it  has  awakened  is  something  which 
nothing  short  of  a  religious  force  is  able  to  arouse. 
Surely,  all  these  facts  not  only  justify,  but  demand,  that 
the  most  careful  attention  should  be  given  to  this  new 
and  mighty  power  which  has  come  into  the  world. 


THE  EVIDENCES  OF  SOCIALISM.  73 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

THE   EVIDENCES    OF    AN   ALLEGED   IRRESISTIBLE 
CURRENT    OF    SOCIALISM. 

THE  various  kinds  of  modern  socialism  have  been 
divided  into  two  main  classes,  —  ethical  systems  and  a 
non-ethical  system.  The  ethical  systems  are  those  which 
make  prominent  the  appeal  to  ethical  sentiment.  The 
advocates  of  these  ethical  systems  of  socialism  attempt  to 
show  that  the  present  order  works  cruelty  and  injustice, 
and  that  the  socialism  which  they  urge  men  to  adopt  will 
establish  righteous  relations  among  men,  and  thus  pro- 
mote human  welfare.  They  think  that  an  exposition  of 
the  benefits  of  socialism,  and  an  appeal  to  the  consciences 
of  men,  are  the  forces  which  are  needed  to  bring  about  the 
new  social  order.  The  earlier  systems  of  socialism  were, 
it  may  be  said,  mainly  ethical  in  this  sense.  Exhortation 
played  an  important  role  in  these,  for  they  were  urged  upon 
men  much  as  religion  is.  The  non-ethical  system  is  not  to 
be  understood  as  anti-ethical.  The  expression  non-ethi- 
cal means  simply  that  the  ethical  element  plays  no  part 
in  the  production  of  anticipated  changes.  These  changes 
come  as  the  result  of  natural  laws  working  in  society. 
Man  observes  these,  and  he  discovers  the  necessary 
results  of  their  operation.  The  most  which  any  individ- 
ual can  do  is  to  work  with  these  social  forces,  possibly 
accelerating  them  somewhat,  and  rendering  the  transi- 
tion from  an  earlier  to  a  more  advanced  stage  of  society 
a  less  painful  and  an  easier  one  than  it  would  otherwise 


74  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

be.  This  non-ethical  socialism  is  that  of  which  Karl 
Marx  is  the  founder.  It  is  claimed  by  his  adherents  that 
he  has  found  a  law  of  evolution  working  in  society  like 
that  which  Darwin  found  in  the  natural  world ;  and,  in 
their  opinion,  the  two  great  intellectual  lights  of  this 
century  are  Karl  Marx  and  Charles  Darwin.  The  ethical 
element  plays  almost,  if  not  wholly,  as  subordinate  a  part 
in  this  socialism  as  in  the  Darwinian  natural  science. 
A  materialistic  conception  goes  with  this  theory  of  social 
evolution,  and  forms  an  essential  part  of  it.  It  makes 
every  social  advance  depend  upon  the  development  of  the 
economic  sphere.  In  this  extreme  form,  it  makes  reli- 
gion and  the  family,  art  and  literature,  products  of  the 
mode  of  producing,  exchanging,  and  distributing  material 
wealth.  This  idea  of  historical  evolution  was  brought 
forward  as  early  as  1847  by  Marx  and  Engels,  in  the 
celebrated  "  Manifesto  of  the  Communist  Party."  Engels 
states  the  fundamental  proposition  which  forms  the  nu- 
cleus of  the  Manifesto  in  the  preface  to  the  English  edi- 
tion of  1888  in  these  words  :  — 

"That  proposition  is:  that  in  every  historical  epoch  the  pre- 
vailing mode  of  economic  production  and  exchange,  and  the 
social  organization  necessarily  following  from  it,  form  the  basis 
upon  which  is  built  up,  and  from  which  alone  can  be  explained, 
the  political  and  intellectual  history  of  that  epoch." 

In  the  Manifesto  itself  we  find  the  following  words :  — 

"Does  it  require  deep  intuition  to  comprehend  that  man's 
ideas,  views,  and  conceptions,  in  one  word,  man's  consciousness, 
changes  with  every  change  in  the  conditions  of  his  material  sub- 
sistence, in  his  social  relations,  and  in  his  social  life  ?  What  else 
does  the  history  of  ideas  prove  than  that  intellectual  production 
changes  its  character  in  proportion  as  material  production  is 
changed  ?" 


THE  EVIDENCES  OF  SOCIALISM.  75 

It  is  the  development  of  economic  society,  then,  which 
is  producing  the  ideas  of  our  time.  The  ideas  are  effect 
and  not  cause.1 

When  we  adopt  this  materialistic  conception  of  history 
our  socialism  becomes  entirely  a  matter  of  evolution 
going  on  in  the  social  world.  This  socialism  is,  from  its 
author,  often  called  Marxist  socialism,  and  it  is  that 
which  is  dominant  in  Germany.  At  the  same  time,  it 
must  be  acknowledged  that  the  German  social  democrats 
are  not  entirely  true  to  this  theory  of  evolutionary  social- 
ism. While  they  give  evolution  a  large  place,  they  do 
introduce  an  ethical  element,  and  appeal  most  earnestly 
to  the  wage-earning  masses  to  help  forward  the  socialistic 
movement.  Their  action  is  based  upon  an  assumption  of 
will,  free,  and  not  bound  wholly,  at  any  rate,  by  social 
laws.  One  of  the  leaders  of  the  German  social  democ- 
racy, in  a  recent  work  giving  an  excellent  succinct  sum- 
mary of  the  German  socialistic  philosophy,  says  that 
socialism  is  necessary,  because  men  are  men  with  incli- 
nations and  capacity  to  struggle  for  the  attainment  of 
their  desires.  The  evolution  of  society  is  such,  he  claims, 
that  we  must,  in  the  future,  either  have  barbarism  or 
socialism ;  and,  taking  men  as  we  find  them,  we  know 
they  will  choose  socialism,  and  they  will  shape  their 
action  in  accordance  with  their  choice.2 

The  evolution  which  is  inevitably  bringing  socialism 
is  that  which  may  be  briefly  described  as  the  develop- 
ment of  competing  industries  into  monopolies  ;  and  this 

1  Cf.  this  statement  in  the  "  Erfurter  Programm,"  by  Karl  Kautsky: 

"  In  the  last  instance  the  history  of  mankind  is  determined,  not  by 

the  ideas  of  men,  but  by  the  development  of  economic  society."  P.  38. 

2    "  Das  Erfurter  Programm,"  by  Karl  Kautsky,  pp.  131-145.     Der 

Aufbau  des  Zukunftsstaates. 


76  SOCIALISM  AND   SOCIAL  REFORM. 

development,  the  socialists  maintain,  is  destined  to  be- 
come practically  universal  and  all-inclusive.  The  social- 
ists trace  the  development  of  industry  from  the  Middle 
Ages,  in  which  production  was  carried  on  in  small  shops, 
and  the  tools  were  owned  by  the  workers.  The  private 
ownership  of  tools  and  of  land  is  held  to  be  proper  to 
industry  on  a  small  scale.  This  period  of  small  industries 
is  followed  by  a  period  of  manufactures,  distinguished 
from  the  present  period,  called  the  period  of  modern  or 
grand  industry.  The  period  of  manufactures  lasted,  it 
is  stated,  from  the  middle  of  the  sixteenth  to  the  last 
third  of  the  eighteenth  century,  when  the  period  of  grand 
industry  began.1 

The  period  of  manufactures  is  characterized  by  the 
employment  of  artisans  by  a  capitalist,  who  assembles 
them  in  one  workshop  and  organizes  their  industry. 
There  arises  in  this  period  the  distinct  capitalistic  and 
employing  class,  separated  by  a  wider  and  wider  gulf  from 
the  growing  wage-earning,  or  proletarian  class.2  The 
development  of  concentration  of  production,  however, 
is  slow  until  we  enter  the  period  of  modern  industry, 
when  it  begins  to  move  at  an  accelerating  rate  of  speed, 
which  continually  increases,  exhibiting  finally  its  true 
nature  in  the  latter  half  of  the  nineteenth  century.  This 
development  will  proceed  until  we  have  complete  con- 
centration of  production,  it  is  claimed  by  socialists ;  and 
the  only  choice  will  be  between  concentration  under 
private  and  irresponsible,  and  concentration  under  public 
and  responsible,  management.  This  concentration  of  pro- 
duction, finally  amounting  to  unification,  demonstrates, 

1  See  "  The  Student's  Marx,"  by  Edward  Aveling,  p.  73. 
a  Proletarian  class  is  now  used  to  designate  a  class  of  wage-earners 
not  owning  the  tools  with  which  they  work. 


THE  EVIDENCES  OF  SOCIALISM.  77 

according  to  the  socialistic  law  of  evolution,  the  possi- 
bility of  socialism.  But  this  evolution  does  more  than 
demonstrate  the  possibility  of  socialism;  it  shows  its 
necessity,  for  along  with  this  growth  of  concentration  in 
production  under  private  management,  the  advantages 
of  increasing  productivity  accrue  to  a  small  class,  while 
the  lot  of  the  great  masses  becomes  more  and  more  in- 
tolerable. There  grows  up  what  is  called  an  industrial 
reserve  army  of  unemployed  men  vainly  seeking  work. 
This  army  naturally  depresses  wages  at  all  times. 
Periods  of  prosperity  cannot  exhaust  it  entirely,  and  thus 
they  do  not  bring  that  increase  in  the  rate  of  wages 
which  would  otherwise  take  place ;  and  periods  of  depres- 
sion swell  the  army  to  enormous  proportions,  and  render 
the  lot  of  the  masses  a  more  hopeless  one  than  before. 
Production  is  carried  on  vigorously ;  but  this  implies  a 
public  with  purchasing  power,  if  production  is  to  continue. 
Now,  it  is  precisely  characteristic  of  modern  industry  that 
the  purchasing  power  of  the  masses,  relatively  at  least, 
declines,  and  less  and  less  keeps  pace  with  the  growth  of 
production.  Consequently  there  must  be  a  relative  over- 
production as  well  as  a  relative  over-population,  as  seen  in 
the  industrial  reserve  army.  Goods  pile  up  until  the 
result  is  a  crisis,  and  consequent  industrial  stagnation. 
Now,  as  the  powers  of  production  increase,  crises  must 
become  more  and  more  frequent,  more  and  more  lasting, 
until  we  can  scarcely  hope  to  escape  from  one  period  of 
industrial  stagnation  before  we  are  overtaken  by  another 
crisis.  This  capitalistic  law  of  development,  it  is  held, 
becomes  intolerable,  and  the  change  to  socialism  becomes 
also  easy,  because  it  is  simply  necessary  to  change  the 
management  of  production,  and  develop  it  a  little  further 
to  attain  the  socialistic  state.  If  we  have,  for  example, 


78  SOCIALISM  AND   SOCIAL  REFORM. 

a  complete  monopoly  in  any  line  of  the  business  the  first 
change,  and  the  great  change,  necessary  to  render  this 
socialistic  is  to  change  the  manager ;  "  to  expropriate  the 
expropriateurs,"  to  use  the  phrase  of  Marx.  This  is 
easier  because  the  workers  have  become  an  army  trained 
and  disciplined  to  act  together ;  and,  moreover,  an  army 
of  men  among  whom  common  experiences,  common  trials, 
and  common  sorrows  have  produced  a  deeper  and  deeper 
feeling  of  solidarity.  The  historical  development  of 
society  is  sketched  by  Friedrich  Engels  in  his  work, 
"The  Development  of  Socialism  from  Utopia  to  Sci- 
ence." l  The  most  recent  and  authoritative  statement, 
however,  is  that  which  is  found  in  the  "Erfurter  Pro- 
gramm,"  the  first  words  of  which,  "  The  economic  develop- 
ment," are  specially  significant.  It  reads  as  follows  :  — 

"  The  economic  development  of  industrial  society  tends  inevit- 
ably to  the  ruin  of  small  industries,  which  are  based  upon  the 
workman's  private  ownership  of  the  means  of  production.  It 
separates  him  from  these  means  of  production,  and  converts  him 
into  a  destitute  member  of  the  proletariat,  whilst  a  comparatively 
small  number  of  capitalists  and  great  landowners  obtain  a  mo- 
nopoly of  the  means  of  production. 

"  Hand  in  hand  with  this  growing  monopoly  goes  the  crushing 
out  of  existence  of  these  shattered  small  industries  by  industries 
of  colossal  growth,  the  development  of  the  tool  into  the  machine, 
and  a  gigantic  increase  in  the  productiveness  of  human  labor. 
But  all  the  advantages  of  this  revolution  are  monopolized  by  the 
capitalists  and  landowners.  To  the  proletariat,  and  to  the  rapidly 
sinking  middle  classes,  to  the  small  tradesmen  of  the  towns  and 
the  peasant  proprietors  ( JRcraern),  it  brings  an  increasing  uncer- 
tainty of  existence,  increasing  misery,  oppression,  servitude, 
degradation,  and  exploitation  (Ausbeutung}. 

1  An  English  translation  is  published  in  Soiinenschein's  Social 
Science  Series.  Another  translation  may  be  had  from  the  office  of 
the  newspaper,  The  People,  184  William  Street,  New  York, 


THE  EVIDENCES  OF  SOCIALISM.  79 

"Ever  greater  grows  the  mass  of  the  proletariat,  ever  vaster 
the  army  of  the  unemployed,  ever  sharper  the  contrast  hetween 
oppressors  and  oppressed,  ever  fiercer  that  war  of  classes  between 
bourgeoisie  and  proletariat  which  divides  modern  society  into 
two  hostile  camps,  and  is  the  common  characteristic  of  every  in- 
dustrial country.  The  gulf  between  the  propertied  classes  and 
the  destitute  is  widened  by  the  crises  arising  from  capitalist  pro- 
duction, which  become  daily  more  comprehensive  and  omnipotent, 
which  make  universal  uncertainty  the  normal  condition  of  soci- 
ety, and  which  furnish  a  proof  that  the  forces  of  production  have 
outgrown  the  existing  social  order,  and  that  private  ownership 
of  the  means  of  production  has  become  incompatible  with  their 
full  development  and  their  proper  application. 

"  Private  ownership  of  the  means  of  production,  formerly  the 
means  of  securing  his  product  to  the  producer,  has  now  become 
the  means  of  expropriating  the  peasant  proprietors,  the  artisans, 
and  the  small  tradesmen:  and  placing  the  non-producers,  the  capi- 
talists, and  large  land-owners  in  possession  of  the  products  of 
labor.  Nothing  but  the  conversion  of  capitalist  private  owner- 
ship of  the  means  of  production  —  the  earth  and  its  fruits,  mines 
and  quarries,  raw  material,  tools,  machines,  means  of  exchange  — 
into  social  ownership,  and  the  substitution  of  socialist  production, 
carried  on  by  and  for  society  in  the  place  of  the  present  produc- 
tion of  commodities  for  exchange,  can  effect  such  a  revolution 
that,  instead  of  large  industries  and  the  steadily  growing  capaci- 
ties of  common  production  being,  as  hitherto,  a  source  of  misery 
and  oppression  to  the  classes  whom  they  have  despoiled,  they  may 
become  a  source  of  the  highest  well-being,  and  of  the  most  perfect 
and  comprehensive  harmony. 

"  This  social  revolution  involves  the  emancipation,  not  merely 
of  the  proletariat,  but  of  the  whole  human  race,  which  is  suffer- 
ing under  existing  conditions.  But  this  emancipation  can  be 
achieved  by  the  working  class  alone,  because  all  other  classes, 
despite  their  mutual  strife  of  interests,  take  their  stand  upon 
the  principle  of  private  ownership  of  the  means  of  production, 
and  have  a  common  interest  in  maintaining  the  existing  social 
order. 

"  The  struggle  of  the  working  classes  against  capitalist  exploita- 
tion must  of  necessity  be  a  political  struggle.  The  working  classes 


80  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL   REFORM. 

can  neither  carry  on  their  economic  struggle,  nor  develop  their 
economic  organization,  without  political  rights.  They  cannot  ef- 
fect the  transfer  of  the  means  of  production  to  the  community 
without  first  being  invested  with  political  power. 

"  It  must  be  the  aim  of  social  democracy  to  give  conscious 
unanimity  to  this  struggle  of  the  working  classes,  and  to  indicate 
the  inevitable  goal." 

A  less  extreme  position  in  regard  to  evolution  is  taken 
generally  by  the  English  Socialists,  especially  by  the 
Fabians;  and  this  less  extreme  position  seems,  to  the 
author,  one  which  gives  socialism  in  reality  a  far  stronger 
case.  The  modern  socialist  does  not  think  that  a  plan  of 
social  reconstruction  can  be  drawn  up  out  of  his  own 
inner  consciousness,  and  then  introduced  purely  by  per- 
suasion. He  holds  that  we  must  observe  carefully  the 
tendencies  of  social  evolution,  and  shape  our  plans  with 
reference  to  these.  He  claims  that  the  evolution  of 
society  which  is  taking  place,  —  chiefly  spontaneously, 
so  far  as  society  at  large  is  concerned ;  that  is  to  say, 
without  any  self-conscious  effort  to  bring  it  about,  —  is 
entirely  favorable  to  socialism,  and  that  socialism  other- 
wise could  not  exist.  At  the  same  time,  he  is  not  in- 
clined to  think  that  the  development  in  the  future  must 
necessarily  take  one  single  form,  or  that  it  will  be  satis- 
factory without  self-conscious  social  effort.  He  does  not 
adopt  the  materialist  conception  of  history,  but  gives 
room  for  the  play  of  conscience,  and  to  the  conscience 
he  does  not  hesitate  to  appeal.  The  more  conservative 
socialists  see  many  evidences  of  the  break-down  of  the 
present  social  order,  showing  the  necessity  of  changes, 
and  they  observe  evidences  of  a  current  set  in  the  direc- 
tion of  socialism.  Among  these  evidences  may  be  men- 
tioned, of  course,  first  of  all  the  tendency  towards 


THE  EVIDENCES  OF  SOCIALISM,  81 

monopoly,  as  evidenced  by  combinations,  rings,  and 
trusts,  and  the  concentration  of  wealth  of  all  kinds  in 
a  few  hands.  The  growing  solidarity  of  labor,  which 
is  becoming  national,  international,  and  even  cosmopol- 
itan, is  adduced  as  a  further  evidence.  The  incompe- 
tency  of  the  captains  of  industry  to  perform  their 
functions  with  respect  to  the  continuous  production  of 
goods,  and  their  inability  to  preserve  their  command 
over  the  industrial  army,  is  to  them  a  strong  proof  that 
a  change  must  come,  and  that  socialism  is  the  natural 
outcome  of  the  present  system.  We  are  asked  to  direct 
our  attention  to  great  strikes,  like  those  which  have  taken 
place  at  Buffalo,  Chicago,  and  elsewhere,  and  to  see  in 
these  proof  positive  of  the  incompetency  of  the  captains 
of  industry,  an  incompetency  for  which  they  as  individ- 
uals are  not  necessarily  to  blame,  but  an  incompetency 
which  arises  out  of  the  nature  of  modern  industrial  so- 
ciety. It  would  be  held,  unquestionably,  that  something 
was  wrong  in  an  army,  if  the  commanders  were  not  able 
to  preserve  order,  and  to  perform  the  functions  which 
naturally  belong  to  them  as  leaders  who  are  to  conduct 
the  army  to  victory.  Crises  and  industrial  depressions 
are  held  by  all  socialists  to  be  a  proof  of  the  break-down 
of  the  present  industrial  system,  and  an  evidence  of  the 
need  for  radical  social  reconstruction. 

Socialists  generally  attach  importance  to  the  moral 
wretchedness  of  society,  as  seen  in  divorces  and  em- 
bezzlements and  defalcations,  both  in  private  and  public 
life ;  because  they  hold  that  society  at  the  present  day  is 
so  constituted  that  these  iniquities  are  its  natural  and 
almost  inevitable  outcome.  Men  cannot  be  honest,  we 
are  told,  and  maintain  themselves  in  the  business  world. 
Private  business,  it  is  maintained,  uses  public  office  for 


82  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL   REFORM. 

its  own  ends,  and  disgraces  public  life.  Competition  in 
business  rules  the  mass  of  men,  and  is  transferred  to 
competition  in  expenditures.  Everyone  desires  to  make 
a  greater  show  than  his  neighbor.  This  leads  to  extrav- 
agance, this  to  wild  speculation,  and  this  to  embezzle- 
ment. The  end  is  seen  in  wide-spread  ruin.  Families 
are  disrupted  in  this  way  among  the  higher  orders,  as 
the  needs  of  industry  separate  them  among  the  poorer 
portion  of  the  community.  It  is  claimed  by  socialists 
that  all  this  trouble  is  too  deep-seated  to  be  cured  by 
any  reform  which  leaves  the  present  industrial  order 
unchanged  in  its  essential  features. 

As  socialism  is  expected  to  come  as  the  result  of  evo- 
lution, to  a  greater  or  less  extent  brought  about  and 
guided  by  the  wishes  and  intelligence  of  men,  it  is  not 
anticipated  by  the  modern  socialists  that  it  will  come 
all  at  once.  No  one  expects  to  go  to  bed  one  night  under 
a  capitalistic  regime  and  to  wake  up  next  morning  with 
socialism  in  full  swing.  It  is  held  rather  that  socialism 
will  come  piecemeal,  although  the  active  and  ardent 
socialists  do  unquestionably  anticipate  that  large  instal- 
ments will  come  in  the  comparatively  near  future,  and 
that  these  will  be  followed  by  other  large  instalments 
with  considerable  rapidity.  Naturally  it  is  thought  that 
large  monopolistic  undertakings  will  be  socialized  first, 
and  business  after  business  will  be  absorbed  as  it  be- 
comes monopolistic.  It  is  not,  by  the  most  moderate  fac- 
tion, proposed  to  take  over  business  conducted  on  a  small 
scale,  unless  those  so  conducting  it  desire  to  give  up  their 
business  and  enter  into  the  co-operative  commonwealth. 
The  small  farmer  and  the  artisan  working  in  his  own 
little  shop  may  continue  their  operations  as  long  as  they 
are  able  to  do  so,  and  desire  to  do  so.  At  the  same  time- 


THE  EVIDENCES   OF   SOCIALISM.  83 

it  is  undoubtedly  expected  that  the  process  of  concentra- 
tion of  businesses  will  be  continued  and  accelerated  when 
something  like  genuine  socialism  is  well  under  way. 
Socialism  proposes  to  carry  forward  existing  industrial 
tendencies,  but  to  direct  tjie  industrial  movement  in  such 
manner  that  it  may  yield  the  greatest  good  to  the  greatest 
number,  and  so  that  the  present  evils  of  these  tendencies 
may  be  altogether  avoided,  or  reduced  to  an  inconsider- 
able minimum.  Consequently  it  is  frankly  admitted 
that  the  small  producer  will  be  less  and  less  able  to  hold 
his  own  against  socialistic  production.  It  is  urged,  how- 
ever, that  even  now  he  is  being  ruined  by  the  competi- 
tion of  great  undertakings,  but  has  no  refuge  except  the 
lot  of  the  wage-earner,  unless  he  chooses  to  become  a 
small  retail  shopkeeper,  or  the  proprietor  of  a  restau- 
rant, to  use  a  German  expression  for  what  we  would  call 
in  the  United  States  a  saloon-keeper,  having  an  insignifi- 
cant hotel  attachment,  that  is  to  say,  maintaining  a  pre- 
carious existence  on  the  fringe  of  economic  society.  It 
is  held,  on  the  other  hand,  that  socialism  would  prove  an 
attractive  force,  and  that  the  small  producers  would 
gradually  surrender  their  businesses  and  enter  some 
branch  of  socialist  production,  so  that  the  expropria- 
tion of  the  small  capitalist  would  take  place  without 
the  suffering  which  at  present  accompanies  it. 

An  interesting  question  is  whether  the  transformation 
will  take  place  with  or  without  compensation.  The  more 
conservative  and  sensible  socialists  desire  that  it  shall 
be  as  easy  as  possible  to  all  concerned,  and  they  do  not 
all  deny  the  possibility  of  compensation  in  consumption 
goods,  in  values  to  be  used,  that  is,  in  consumption,  but 
for  which  there  would  be  little  opportunity  to  find  pro- 
ductive employment,  and  thus  yield  income.  The  Fa- 


84  SOCIALISM  AND   SOCIAL    REFORM. 

bian  Society  of  England  desires  that  the  change  should 
go  forward  without  payment  for  capital  and  land,  that 
is  to  say,  the  instruments  of  production  generally,  hold- 
ing that  this  cannot  be  required  by  ethical  considera- 
tions; but  they  think  that  the  extinction  of  private 
property  in  land  and  capital  should  not  be  effected  with- 
out relief  to  expropriated  individuals.1 

Another  interesting  question  of  great  importance  is 
whether  the  changes  proposed  by  socialism  are  to  be 
accomplished  peacefully.  It  may  be  said,  in  general, 
that  socialists  earnestly  hope  that  peaceful  and  legal 
measures  will  be  sufficient.  Some,  however,  hold  that 
the  opponents  of  socialism,  that  is  to  say,  in  the  main, 
the  privileged  classes,  will  rebel  against  the  constituted 
authorities,  when  they  once  clearly  perceive  that  these 
are  exercising  their  power  in  behalf  of  the  socialistic 
state.  Yet  there  are  those  who  hold  that  socialism  is 
already  stealing  upon  us  unawares,  and  that  its  approach 
will  be  sufficiently  gradual  and  beneficent  to  meet  with 
more  and  more  favor,  and  thus  anticipate  no  violence, 
even  from  the  higher  orders  of  society.  Perhaps  it  can 
be  said,  in  general,  that  the  English  socialists  are  the 
least  apprehensive  that  the  transformation  will  be  ac- 
companied by  anything  like  civil  war. 

1  Appendix  II.,  "  Basis  of  the  Fabian  Society." 


SOCIALISM   WITH  OTHER   SCHEMES.  85 


CHAPTER  IX. 

SOCIAUSM    CONTRASTED   "WITH   OTHER   SCHEMES 
OF   INDUSTRIAL    CHANGE. 

SOCIALISM  in  the  popular  sense  is  often  brought  into 
opposition  with  what  is  called  state  socialism.  Refer- 
ence has  already  been  made  to  state  socialism,  and  it  is 
not  necessary  to  add  many  words  to  what  has  been  said 
regarding  it.  State  socialism  is  an  expression  which 
originated  in  Germany,  and  refers  to  reforms  to  be  ac- 
complished by  the  existing  state,  with  a  view  to  the 
establishment  of  permanent  social  peace.  State  social- 
ism, as  viewed  in  Germany,  may  mean  the  absorption  of 
the  production  and  distribution  of  wealth  by  the  state, 
or  it  may  mean  a  further  extension  of  the  industrial 
activity  of  the  state  without  going  so  far.  But,  at  any 
rate,  it  does  not  propose  radical  changes  in  the  state 
itself.  Social  democracy,  which  is,  generally  speaking, 
socialism  in  the  popular  sense,  is  socialism  plus  democ- 
racy; but  state  socialism  in  Germany  is  socialism  plus 
monarchy,  and  is  therefore  conservative.  The  social  de- 
mocracy advocates  a  class  struggle  to  be  conducted  by 
the  wage-earning  class,  and  to  be  continued  until  it  is 
able  to  abolish  all  classes.  State  socialism  proposes  that 
a  power  above  the  people  shall  regulate  the  relations 
among  classes,  and  establish  among  them  harmony  and 
peace.  If  state  socialism  goes  so  far  as  to  propose  that 
the  state  should  take  upon  itself  the  production  and  dis- 
tribution of  wealth,  it  contemplates  still  the  existence  of 


86  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

higher  and  lower  classes,  and  would  transform  the  cap- 
tains of  industry  into  superior  civil  servants,  still  guid- 
ing and  managing  production.  Social  democracy,  on  the 
other  hand,  wants  the  administration  of  the  economic 
state  to  be  conducted  democratically  in  such  manner 
that  it  may  confer  substantially  equal  benefits  upon  all. 
.A  leader  of  German  social  democracy  says  that  state 
socialism  is  a  name  proper  only  to  those  interferences 
of  the  state,  or  extensions  of  the  functions  of  the  state, 
"  which  aim  to  make  an  end  to  the  class  struggle  between 
the  bourgeoisie  and  the  proletariat,  and  to  reconcile  social 
classes  by  means  of  a  strong  monarchical  political  power, 
which,  standing  above  the  classes  and  independent  of 
them,  gives  to  each  one  its  own.  This  activity  of  the 
power  of  the  state  is  designed  to  make  it  unnecessary,  or 
even  impossible,  thab  the  proletariat  should  represent 
and  care  for  its  own  interests.  The  intention  is  rather 
that,  full  of  confidence,  it  should  commit  its  interests  to 
the  government." 

This  same  writer  says  that  state  socialism  presupposes, 
as  an  essential  characteristic,  the  existence  of  a  govern- 
ment independent  of  the  masses.1 

It  is  difficult,  then,  to  see  how,  according  to  the  leaders 
of  social  democratic  thought  in  Germany,  the  expression 
state  socialism  would  have  any  particular  applicability 
in  democratic  countries.  At  the  most,  the  protest  against 
state  socialism  in  these  countries  can  mean  that  political 
as  well  as  economic  changes  are  required  to  bring  about 
the  socialistic  ideal.  It  is,  however,  admitted  by  all 
socialists  that  the  present  state  is  not  anywhere  entirely 
satisfactory.  If  it  is  held  that,  from  the  standpoint  of 

*  Die  Neue  Zeit,  X.  Jahrgang,  II.  Band,  s.  TOG;  Karl  Kautsky  io 
his  article,  "  Vollmar  und  der  Staatssozialismus." 


SOCIALISM   WITH  OTHER  SCHEMES.  87 

socialism,  there  is  class  government  in  democratic  coun- 
tries like  the  United  States,  as  well  as  in  Germany,  the 
question  is  to  be  asked,  What  is  the  basis  of  this  class 
government,  except  private  property  in  the  instruments 
of  production,  and  will  it  not  disappear  if  private  prop- 
erty in  the  instruments  of  production  is  transformed  into 
public  property  in  these  instruments  ?  Of  course,  in 
Germany,  class  government  has  a  far  broader  basis. 

Socialism  and  nationalism  are  two  expressions  which 
require  some  treatment,  because  the  use  of  these  two 
terms  produces  an  endless  amount  of  confusion.  Nation- 
alism, it  may  be  said,  is  simply  one  kind  of  socialism ; 
and  if  there  is  any  such  thing  as  a  distinctive  American 
socialism,  it  must  be  held  to  be  nationalism.  National- 
ism contemplates,  perhaps,  fewer  changes  in  the  state,  — 
using  the  word  state  in  its  generic  sense,  —  than  does 
social  democracy,  represented  in  this  country  by  the 
socialistic  labor  party.  Nationalism  is,  in  this  respect, 
more  conservative.  It  proposes  to  use,  in  the  niain,  the 
existing  political  divisions  of  the  country,  although  Mr. 
Bellamy  contemplates  the  wiping  out  of  the  separate 
commonwealths  as  distinct  political  divisions.  This, 
however,  is  no  necessary  part  of  either  the  nationalistic 
or  the  socialistic  program,  and  it  would  seem  to  have 
been  a  bad  slip  on  Mr.  Bellamy's  part,  weakening  his 
cause.  Nationalism,  as  it  has  been  presented  in  this 
country,  is  also  clear  and  explicit  as  to  equality  in  distri- 
bution; but  this  can  hardly  be  put  forward  as  a  pecu- 
liarity. Perhaps  the  greatest  difference  of  all,  between 
the  socialistic  labor  party  and  nationalism,  is  found  in 
the  fact  that  nationalism  does  not  present  socialism  as  a 
class  movement.  The  socialistic  labor  party  makes  social- 
ism a  movement  of  the  wage-earning  classes,  whereas 


88  {SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

nationalism  appeals  to  all  classes,  and  hopes  to  avoid 
class  struggles.  Nationalism  has  found  its  adherents 
to  some  considerable  extent  among  the  professional 
classes,  and  the  spirit  and  the  method  with  which  it  has 
conducted  its  agitation  of  socialism  distinguish  it  from 
the  socialistic  labor  party  to  a  greater  extent  than  differ- 
ences in  final  program.1 

Socialism  is  often  contrasted  with  Christian  socialism, 
and  we  frequently  hear  it  said  we  must  either  have 
socialism  or  Christian  socialism.  It  is  to  be  feared, 
however,  that  the  expression,  Christian  socialism  con- 

1  A  prominent  nationalist  sends  the  author  the  following  statement 
of  principles:  "Nationalism  is  logically  formulated  state  socialism. 
It  completes  the  scheme  of  democracy  by  making  the  plan  of  political 
equality  practicable  through  the  institution  of  economic  equality.  It 
places  political  freedom  upon  its  correct  basis  of  economic  freedom. 
It  solves  the  problem  of  an  equitable  distribution  of  the  industrial  pro- 
ducts which,  under  the  capacity  of  modern  mechanical  processes,  are 
potentially  sufficient  to  meet  the  requirements  of  all  mankind,  by 
transferring  the  ownership  of  the  instrument  of  production  from 
private  hands  —  which  now  operate  them  primarily  with  reference  to 
personal  profit,  and  only  secondarily  with  reference  to  public  service  — 
to  the  producers  themselves,  thus  organizing  production  and  distribu- 
tion as  national  functions,  conducted  solely  with  reference  to  the  public 
welfare  —  the  instrumentality  of  the  government  being  what  Mr.  Bel- 
lamy has  so  aptly  declared  to  be  'the  hand  of  the  people.'  To  attain 
these  ends  the  nationalist  plan  is  to  encourage  all  tendencies  towards 
augmenting  the  business  efficiency  of  the  community,  whether  national, 
state,  or  municipal.  There  appears  to  be  no  means  of  equitably  appor- 
tioning the  returns  from  industrial  production  among  the  members  of 
the  community —  owing  to  the  impossibility  of  determining  the  share 
to  which  each  is  entitled  —  on  any  basis  of  merit  or  effort.  An  equal 
division  of  the  products,  therefore,  appears  to  be  demanded  on  ethical 
grounds;  and,  as  under  a  national  organization  of  industry  there  would 
be  ample  to  meet  all  demands  for  not  only  the  necessities,  but  tha 
comforts  and  the  reasonable  luxuries  of  life,  there  would  be  no  hard- 
ship or  injustice  in  such  an  apportionment.  But  as  this  is  the  ulti- 
mate aim,  it  can  only  be  stated  as  an  ideal,  and  does  not  form  a  feature 
of  any  immediate  program." 


SOCIALISM   WITH  OTHER   SCHEMES.  89 

veys  no  very  clear  ideas,  and  is  such  that  it  is  not  easy  to 
define  it  with  any  accuracy.  Christian  socialism  means 
many  different  things.  One  thing  which  it  always  means 
is  a  spirit  of  brotherly  love,  which,  it  is  insisted,  is  an 
essential  part  of  Christianity.  Christian  socialism  means 
that  we  are  invariably  to  make  our  Christianity  some- 
thing real  and  vital,  and  to  govern  our  lives  by  it  seven 
days  in  the  week,  and  on  the  market,  as  well  as  in  the 
church  building.  Christian  socialism  carries  with  it  a 
protest  against  the  sham  and  hypocrisy  which  play  such 
large  parts  in  the  lives  of  professed  Christians.  Christian 
socialism,  furthermore,  teaches  us  the  doctrine  of  social 
solidarity,  which  signifies  that  our  interests  are  all  inter- 
twined, and  that  one  cannot  be  truly  prosperous  while 
others  suffer.1  What  can  we  say  more  than  this  about 
Christian  socialism  as  a  whole  ?  If  these  characteristics 
are  all  we  can  say  of  Christian  socialism  as  a  whole,  is 
it  not  something  entirely  vague  and  indefinite  when  we 
come  to  its  application  to  economic  problems  ?  The 
vital  question,  of  course,  is :  How  shall  we  apply  these 
principles  of  brotherhood  to  the  world's  business  ? 

The  Christian  socialism  of  the  middle  of  the  century 
in  England  meant  a  co-operative  commonwealth  to  be 
attained  through  voluntary  effort.  But  Christian  social- 
ism sometimes  means  simply  modern  socialism  plus 
Christianity,  the  implication  being  that  Christianity  of 
itself  leads  to  socialism.  Of  course,  whether  Christian- 
ity does  lead  to  socialism  or  not  must  depend  upon  the 
view  which  we  take  with  respect  to  socialism.  As  has 
already  been  said,  the  Christian  who  thinks  that  social- 

1  "  While  one  man  remains  base,  no  man  can  be  altogether  great 
and  noble."  This  utterance  of  Margaret  Fuller  is  entirely  in  the 
spirit  of  Christian  socialism. 


90  SOCIALISM  AND   SOCIAL   REFORM. 

ism  will  bring  what  its  adherents  promise  must,  of 
course,  become  a  socialist.  But  the  whole  question  at 
issue  is  whether  or  not  socialism  is  able  to  keep  its 
promises.  Sometimes  Christian  socialism  means  social- 
ism with  a  protest  against  the  materialism  which  the 
Marxists  have  most  unfortunately  associated  with  social- 
ism. It  may  also  have  reference  to  methods  of  agita- 
tion, and  mean  that  only  those  methods  will  meet  with 
approval  which  are  compatible  with  Christian  ethics. 
Christian  socialism  would  thus  imply  a  protest  against 
violent  measures.  But  as  socialists  have  generally  re- 
nounced anything  but  peaceful,  legal,  and  constitutional 
methods,  Christian  socialism  as  thus  used  would  not 
carry  with  it  anything  very  distinctive.  It  would  seem, 
perhaps,  best  to  drop  the  use  of  the  expression  Christian 
socialism  as  something  which  leads  to  confusion  rather 
than  to  clearness  of  thought,  unless,  indeed,  accompany- 
ing the  expression,  some  clear  explanation  of  it  be  given. 
A  few  other  distinctions  require  explanation  to  bring 
out  current  misapprehensions,  and  to  render  socialistic 
thought  clearer  by  way  of  contrast.  Socialism  is  often 
described  as  paternalism.  Probably  no  objection  to  so- 
cialism is,  in  the  United  States,  more  frequently  heard 
than  that  it  is  paternalism.  This  is,  beyond  all  doubt,  a 
misapprehension.  Most  of  those  who  have  used  the  ex- 
pression paternalism  employ  it  altogether  in  a  loose  way, 
which  lacks  definite  and  precise  meaning.  Paternalism 
in  government  is  an  historical  conception  which  became 
important  in  the  seventeenth  century  in  England.  The 
controversy  between  Sir  Robert  Filmer  and  the  philoso- 
pher Locke  was  one  which  concerned  paternalism  in  the 
true  sense  of  the  word.  It  was  a  controversy  regarding 
the  nature  of  sovereignty,  and  it  did  not  at  all  concern 


SOCIALISM    WITH  OTHER   SCHEMES.  91 

the  extent  of  the  functions  of  government.  Sir  Robert 
Filmer  held  that  the  power  of  sovereignty  was  like  that 
of  the  father  of  the  family,  and  was  in  fact  derived  from 
Adam,  who  was  the  first  sovereign  as  well  as  father,  and 
that  through  the  patriarchs  it  descended  to  kings.  Fil- 
mer's  work  was  called  "  Patriarcha,  or  the  Natural 
Power  of  Kings."  Its  character  is  indicated  by  the 
titles  of  the  three  chapters  into  which  it  is  divided. 
These  titles  are  as  follows :  Chapter  I.,  That  the  First 
Kings  were  Fathers  of  Families  ;  Chapter  II.,  It  is  Un- 
natural for  the  People  to  Govern  or  to  Choose  Governors ; 
Chapter  III.,  Positive  Laws  do  not  Infringe  the  Natural 
and  Fatherly  Power  of  Kings.1  It  would  seem,  then, 
that  those  are  historically  inaccurate  who  use  "  pater- 
nalism "  as  if  it  had  reference  to  the  functions  of  govern- 
ment. They  are  also  illogical  when  they  use  the  word 
paternalism  to  describe  the  activity  of  a  democratic 
state,  because  in  a  democracy  the  people  themselves  ex- 
ercise power,  and  the  state  does  not  exist  as  something 
separate  and  distinct  from  them.  There  has  become 
current,  however,  a  kind  of  paternalism  which  meets 
with  much  favor  on  the  part  of  many.  It  is  the  pater- 
nalism of  the  rich  and  powerful.2 

There  are  those  who  look  to  leaders  of  wealth  and 
culture  to  provide  for  the  people  many  things  which  the 
people  need.  These  adherents  of  paternalism  hold  that 
rich  men  should  furnish  the  people  of  the  United  States 

1  Locke's  "  Essay  on  Civil  Government "  was  a  reply  to  Patriarcha  ; 
the  two  are  printed  together  in  Morley's  Universal  Library. 

2  An  editorial  writer  in  one  of  the  leading  weeklies  of  the  United 
States  has  expressed  himself  favorably  to  the  paternalism  of  the  rich, 
and  has  given  it  as  his  opinion  that  the  American  people  are  willing 
to  tolerate  any  amount  of  paternalism  of  this  sort.     It  is  hoped  that 
this  is  not  entirely  correct. 


92  SOCIALISM  AND   SOCIAL  REFORM. 

with  universities,  with  art  galleries,  with  educational 
institutions  of  all  sorts,  and  take  the  lead  in  every  kind 
of  social  activity.  The  people  are  not  to  help  them- 
selves through  government,  but  are  to  wait  quietly  until 
it  pleases  some  wealthy  person  to  give  them  the  things 
which  they  want.  It  has  also  become  customary  in 
many  parts  of  the  country  in  all  large  business  under- 
takings to  wait  upon  the  movements  of  a  few  leaders  of 
large  means ;  and  the  masses  of  the  people  are,  in  too 
many  sections  of  the  country,  losing  that  enterprise  and 
initiative  which  it  was  claimed  characterized  the  early 
Americans. 

Whatever  other  accusation  we  may  bring  against  so- 
cialism as  actually  presented  to-day  by  its  active  leaders, 
it  is  not  true  that  it  favors  paternalism,  either  through 
governments  or  by  the  rich.  Karl  Marx  early  told  the 
workingmen  that  they  must  look  to  themselves  for  eman- 
cipation, and  warned  them  not  to  expect  or  to  seek  help 
from  other  classes.  Socialistic  agitation  has  laid  ex- 
treme emphasis  upon  self-help,  and  the  wage-earners 
have  been  estranged  by  the  social  democratic  agitation 
from  persons  of  wealth  and  social  power  of  other  kinds 
who  could  render  them  valuable  service  in  their  efforts 
to  improve  their  conditions. 

Socialism  and  anarchy  are  often  confounded,  although 
they  are  different  enough,  and,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  social- 
ists and  anarchists  are  most  bitter  enemies.  Every- 
where socialism  fights  anarchy,  and,  on  the  other  hand, 
is  antagonized  by  it.  Where  the  one  is  strong,  the  other, 
as  already  stated,  is  likely  to  languish.  Social  democ- 
racy drove  John  Most  out  of  Germany,  and  from  early 
days  has  exerted  itself  most  vigorously  to  keep  down 
anything  like  an  anarchistic  movement.  The  weakness 


SOCIALISM   WITH  OTHER   SCHEMES.  93 

of  anarchy  in  Germany  is  to  be  attributed  more  largely 
to  the  efforts  of  the  social  democracy  than  to  any  other 
force.  Anarchists,  when  discovered,  are  regularly- ex- 
pelled from  the  conventions  of  the  social  democrats  in 
Germany,  and  they  were  expelled  from  the  International 
Socialistic  Convention  in  Brussels  in  1891,  and  again  in 
Ztlrich  in  1893.  So  much  about  the  facts  of  the  case. 

So  far  as  the  anarchistic  theory  is  concerned  it  may 
be  said  that  it  desires  the  co-operative  commonwealth 
to  be  attained  by  the  abolition  of  all  government.  It 
resists  authority  as  the  chief  evil.  It  holds  that  the  co- 
operative commonwealth  would  spontaneously  come  into 
existence,  if  it  were  not  possible,  through  government, 
for  one  man  to  exercise  authority  over  another  man. 
This  anticipation  the  socialists  look  upon  as  Utopian, 
and  they  dread  above  everything  the  anarchistic  agita- 
tion against  existing  governments.  The  anarchists  re- 
frain from  participation  in  government,  and  seek  its 
overthrow;  while  the  socialists  take  part  in  the  exist- 
ing governments,  and  seek  to  accomplish  their  ends  by 
constitutional  and  legal  measures.  One  moves  in  one 
direction  and  the  other  in  the  opposite  direction;  and 
it  is  not  strange  that  the  socialistic  labor  party  not  long 
ago  published  a  tract  entitled,  "Anarchy  and  Socialism 
Antagonistic  Opposites."  1 

Socialism  may  be  contrasted  with  voluntary  co-opera- 
tioii,  especially  as  presented  by  the  early  English  Chris- 
tian Socialists;  that  is,  Ludlow,  Hughes,  Vansittart 
Neale,  Charles  Kingsley,  and  others.  Co-operation,  as 
a  scheme  of  social  reconstruction,  seeks  the  co-operative 
commonwealth ;  but  it  hopes  to  attain  this  in  the  main 

1  The  Fabian  Society  lias  recently  published  a  tract  called  "  The 
Impossibilities  of  Anarchism," 


94  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

without  the  aid  of  government,  and  hopes  that  using 
institutions  as  they  exist,  by  industry  and  thrift  the 
workers  may  acquire  the  instruments  of  production  and 
organize  production  themselves,  carrying  it  on  at  their 
own  risk.  It  has  been  hoped  that  co-operative  under- 
taking would  follow  co-operative  undertaking,  until  all 
industry  should  be  absorbed,  and  the  workers  should 
enjoy  the  benefits  resulting  from  ownership  of  land  and 
capital,  and  from  the  management  of  business.  The  ad- 
adherents  of  voluntary  co-operation,  who,  it  must  be 
acknowledged,  are  not  now  very  numerous,  like  the  an- 
archists, do  not  propose  to  establish  a  co-operative  com- 
monwealth through  government,  but  through  voluntary 
efforts ;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  they  do  not  antagonize 
existing  institutions  and  governments  as  hostile  to  their 
plans. 

Land  nationalization,  so  much  discussed,  is  simply  one 
plank  in  the  platform  of  the  socialists,  and  socialists 
only  antagonize  it  when  it  is  presented  as  something 
complete  and  sufficient.  The  single  tax,  however,  which 
is  the  expression  used  to  indicate  the  plans  of  Mr.  Henry 
George  and  his  followers,  is  still  farther  removed  from 
socialism.  What  the  single  tax  proposes  in  itself,  as  we 
have  already  seen,  is  to  tax  out  of  land  the  value  which 
is  due  to  social  effort ;  to  deduct  the  value  of  the  land 
itself  as  distinct  from  improvements  on  the  land,  but  to 
leave  the  cultivation  and  other  utilization  of  land  to  pri- 
vate effort.  The  recent  development  of  the  single  taxers 
in  the  United  States  has  been  in  the  direction  of  individ- 
ualism ;  but  elsewhere,  as  in  Australia  and  New  Zealand, 
it  appears  that  the  single  tax  has  been  combined  with 
other  measures  to  which  the  socialists  could  give  ap- 
proval, and  that  it  has  not  in  these  countries  assumed 


SOCIALISM   WITH  OTHER  SCHEMES.  95 

the  anti-socialistic  cast  which  it  has  at  present  in  the 
United  States. 

Socialism,  finally,  must  be  contrasted  with  social  reform. 
The  two  often  favor  similar  measures,  and  are  confounded 
by  loose  observers ;  but  the  more  carefully  one  looks  into 
them,  the  greater  appears  the  difference.  Socialists 
themselves  have  come  to  see  this ;  but  it  has  not  been  so 
generally  perceived  by  the  more  pronounced  opponents 
of  socialism.  Social  reform  has  been  called  by  a  German 
writer  "  Positivism,"  to  indicate  its  positive  constructive 
nature.  It  does  not  hold  that  an  entire  social  reconstruc- 
tion is  necessary,  but  believes  that  much  which  has  been 
done  in  the  past,  and  is  incorporated  in  the  existing  soci- 
ety, is  very  good ;  and  it  proposes  the  careful  development 
and  improvement  of  existing  institutions.  Social  reform 
does  not  find  any  one  panacea  for  social  evils,  but  holds 
that  remedies  are  numerous,  because  society  is  many- 
sided  and  complex.  Social  reform  views  with  favor  what 
socialists  and  adherents  of  the  panaceas  generally  look 
upon  with  impatience  as  mere  patchwork.  Social  reform 
looks  to  the  church  and  voluntary  associations  of  men,  as 
well  as  to  the  state,  for  further  growth  and  improvement. 
Social  reform  is  very  generally  willing  to  extend  the 
functions  of  government,  and  is  not  unfrequently  willing 
to  go  so  far  as  the  socialization  of  monopoly;  but  it  does 
not  see  the  desirability  of  the  socialization  of  the  entire 
industrial  field.  Social  reform  is  conservative,  and  not 
revolutionary. 


96  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 


CHAPTER   X. 
THE  LITERATURE   OF  SOCIALISM. 

THE  writings  of  socialists  of  recognized  standing  are 
the  primary  sources  of  information  concerning  socialism. 
Modern  socialism  exists  nowhere  in  actual  practice,  and 
consequently  we  cannot  study  socialism  in  action.  We 
may  observe,  on  the  one  hand,  certain  forces  actually  at 
work  in  society  which  throw  some  light  on  the  industrial 
reconstruction  proposed  by  socialism,  and,  on  the  other, 
we  can  direct  our  attention  to  the  agitation  of  socialists 
which  aims  to  bring  about  the  realization  of  their  aspira- 
tions. While  we  can  derive  help  in  understanding  the 
nature  of  socialism  from  existing  social  tendencies,  and 
from  an  examination  of  socialistic  agitation,  the  works 
written  by  socialists  can  alone  give  us  full  and  complete 
information  at  first  hand.  There  are  certain  men  who 
are  acknowledged  to  be  socialist  leaders,  and  there  are 
books  which  are  recognized  by  socialists  as  correct  ex- 
positions of  socialism.  The  spoken  utterances  of  social- 
ists and  their  writings  are  decisive  concerning  modern 
socialism.  The  careful  student  will  wish  to  go  to  the 
original  sources  of  information. 

The  chief  writer  of  modern  socialism  is  unquestionably 
Karl  Marx,  and  his  principal  work  is  "Das  Kapital," 
frequently  called  "the  Bible  of  socialism."  The  position 
which  Marx  occupies  is  also  illustrated  by  the  state- 
ment of  a  socialist  that  "socialism  is  a  religion  and 
Marx  is  its  Luther."  One  volume  of  Marx's  "  Kapital " 


THE  LITERATURE   OF  SOCIALISM.  97 

was  published  before  his  death,  and  the  second  was  pre- 
pared for  publication  after  his  death,  from  his  manu- 
scripts, by  his  friend,  Friedrich  Engels ;  the  third  volume, 
likewise  prepared  by  this  friend,  is  expected  to  appear 
soon.  Karl  Marx  is  regarded,  even  by  many  who  are  not 
socialists,  as  one  of  the  greatest  thinkers  of  the  century, 
and  few  others  have  influenced  the  development  of  eco- 
nomic thought  as  he  has.  His  work  is  largely  a  chain 
of  deductive  reasoning,  and  is  difficult  reading,  but  it 
must  be  mastered  by  him  who  would  thoroughly  under- 
stand what  the  socialism  of  to-day  is.  Marx,  unfortu- 
nately, attached  to  socialism  certain  things  which  do  not 
belong  to  it  as  an  industrial  system,  for  he  made  social- 
ism a  philosophy  of  every  department  of  social  life. 
This  is  a  natural  consequence  of  his  materialistic  con- 
ception of  history,  to  which  reference  has  already  been 
made.  Unfortunately  his  followers  in  Germany  and 
other  countries  have  not  yet  been  able  to  emancipate 
themselves  from  his  materialistic  conception  of  history 
as  a  natural  evolution  determined  by  economic  condi- 
tions. Socialism,  to  the  strict  Marxist,  means  a  con- 
ception of  religion,  of  literature,  and  of  science,  as  well 
as  of  an  economic  philosophy.  It  is  thus  that  socialism, 
in  countries  like  Germany,  has  raised  needless  antago- 
nism, because  it  has  seemed  to  be  opposed  to  Christianity 
and  to  many  received  institutions  which  have  no  neces- 
sary direct  connection  with  industry.  Nevertheless,  Marx 
must  be  studied  carefully,  even  to  understand  the  social- 
ism of  those  who  reject  his  materialism  and  all  that  goes 
with  it.  It  is  true  that  in  socialism  Karl  Marx  occupies 
a  position  like  that  of  Adam  Smith  in  the  history  of 
political  economy,  all  going  before  him  in  a  manner 
preparing  the  way  for  him,  and  all  coming  after  taking 
him  for  a  starting-point. 


98          SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

The  first  volume  of  "  Das  Kapital,"  which  is  in  a 
measure  complete  in  itself,  has  been  translated  into 
English  by  Mr.  William  Moore,  a  friend  of  Marx,  and 
by  Dr.  Edward  Aveling,  Marx's  son-in-law.  The  transla- 
tion has  been  edited  by  Friedrich  Engels,  and  it  may  be 
taken  to  be  a  faithful  rendering  of  the  original. 

Many  expositions  of  Marx's  views  have  been  published, 
but  perhaps  the  two  most  noteworthy  are  "  The  Student's 
Marx,"  by  Dr.  Aveling,  and  "  Karl  Marx'  Oekonomische 
Lehren,"  by  Karl  Kautsky.  It  is  noteworthy  that  Dr.  Ave- 
ling has  also  prepared  a  work  called  "  The  Student's  Dar- 
win," because  this  is  an  illustration  of  the  fact  that  the 
German  socialist  assigns  a  position  in  social  science  to  Karl 
Marx  like  that  which  Charles  Darwin  holds  in  natural 
science.  Dr.  Aveling,  however,  who  is  a  specialist  in 
natural  science,  does  not  hesitate  to  assign  a  higher  posi- 
tion to  Marx.  The  following  words  are  taken  from  Dr. 
Aveling's  preface : 

"  Marx  was  more  universal.  Darwin  was  a  man  given  up  to 
biological,  or  at  the  most,  scientific  work  in  the  restricted  sense 
of  the  word.  Marx  was,  on  the  other  hand,  master  in  the  full- 
est sense,  not  only  of  his  special  subject,  but  of  all  branches  of 
science,  of  seven  or  eight  different  languages,  of  the  literature  of 
Europe.  He  knew  and  loved  all  forms  of  art  —  poetry  and  the 
drama  most  of  all.  .  .  .  Another  difference  between  the  two 
men,  with  the  advantage  on  the  side  of  the  economic  philosopher, 
is  that  he  was  not  only  a  philosopher,  but  a  man  of  action.  Marx 
was  an  active  leader  of  men  and  of  organizations.  Thousands  of 
workers  of  both  sexes  and  of  all  lands,  who  may  never  read  a 
line  of  his  philosophic  writings,  know  him  and  love  him  as  a  prac- 
tical revolutionist  who,  more  than  any  other,  helped  to  make  the 
working-class  revolt  of  the  nineteenth  century,  and  who  as  long 
js  he  lived  took  an  active  and  informing  part  in  it."  1 

i  Pages  ix.,  x. 


THE  LITERATURE   OF  SOCIALISM.  99 

Friedrich  Engels  is,  next  to  Marx,  the  most  important 
man  in  the  history  of  German  social  democracy.  While 
he  generously  ascribed  the  chief  originality  in  the  so- 
cialistic philosophy  to  Marx,  it  is  held  by  some  of  his 
friends  that  he  is  the  more  systematic  thinker.  Marx 
and  Engels,  however,  worked  together,  and  it  is  prob- 
ably impossible  to  tell  just  what  each  one  may  owe 
to  the  other.  The  Manifesto  of  the  communist  party, 
issued  in  1847,  is  their  joint  product  and  is  one  of 
the  chief  original  documents  in  the  history  of  modern 
socialism.1 

The  principal  works  of  Engels  are :  "Lage  der  arbeit- 
enden  Klasse  in  England,  in  1844,"  published  in  Eng- 
land in  1845,  two  years  before  the  Manifesto  was  issued. 
This  work  has  been  translated  by  Mrs.  Florence  Kelley 
with  an  appendix  written  in  1886  and  a  preface  in  1887, 
and  it  was  published  in  the  latter  year.2  The  second  is, 
"  Entwickelung  des  Sozialismus  von  der  Utopie  zur  Wis- 
senschaft,"  translated  into  English  and  published  under 
the  title,  "  Socialism,  Utopian  and  Scientific." 8  The 
third  is  "Ursprung  der  Familie,  des  Privateigenthums 
und  des  Staates." 

August  Bebel,  one  of  the  two  great  political  leaders  of 
the  German  social  democracy  at  the  present  day,  has 
written  a  work  which  forms  an  important  part  of  the 
literature  of  German  socialism.  It  is  called  "  Die  Frau 
und  der  Sozialismus." 4  An  early  edition  of  this  work 

1  An  English  translation,  edited  and  annotated  by  Friedrich 
Engels  in  1888,  is  published  by  the  New  York  Labor  News  Co., 
64  East  Fourth  street,  New  York,  and  by  William  Reeves,  London, 
1888. 

*  New  York,  John  W.  Lovell  &  Co.  It  has  also  been  published  in 
England  by  William  Reeves,  London. 

8  Sonnenschein,  London,  1892.  .    *  Stuttgart,  1891. 


100  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

has  been  translated  under  the  title,  "  Woman  in  the 
Past,  Present,  and  Future."  1 

The  works  named,  if  carefully  studied,  will  give  one 
a  very  correct  knowledge  of  the  fundamental  principles 
of  German  socialism ;  but  one  who  would  understand  it 
fully  as  it  exists  to-day  would  do  well  to  read  the  clear 
and  concise  exposition  of  the  present  platform  or  pro- 
gram of  German  social  democracy  by  Karl  Kautsky.  It 
is  called  "  Das  Erfurter  Programm." 2 

Die  Neue  Zeit,  a  weekly  magazine  of  scientific  social- 
ism, will  be  found  helpful  to  anyone  who  wishes  to  go 
into  minute  details,  and  to  follow  the  progress  of  the 
movement,  especially  so  far  as  its  theoretical  aspects  are 
concerned.  Der  Vorwarts  is  the  chief  daily  organ  of  the 
social  democratic  party,  and  gives  particular  details  of 
the  agitation. 

A  professor  in  the  law  school  of  the  University  of 
Vienna,  Dr.  Anton  Menger,  has  written  works  which  are 
of  importance  in  modern  socialism,  especially  because 
they  view  socialism  from  the  legal  standpoint.  Atten- 
tion is  called  to  the  two  following  treatises  by  Dr.  Men- 
ger :  "  Das  Recht  auf  den  vollen  Arbeitsertrag,"  8  and 
"Die  besitzlosen  Volksklassen."  * 

There  are  two  other  writers  who  are  of  great  importance 
to  those  who  would  understand  the  evolution  of  socialistic 
thought  in  Germany,  although  their  works  are  not  received 
as  authority  by  the  social  democratic  party.  The  first  is 
Karl  Rodbertus,  often  called  Rodbertus-Jagetzow,  a  man 


1  Published  in  New  York  by  John  W.  Lovell  &  Co.,  1886,  and  in 
England  by  the  Modern  Press,  London,  1885. 

2  Stuttgart,  J.  H.  W.  Dietz,  1892. 

3  Second  revised  edition,  Stuttgart,  1891. 

*  Second  corrected  edition,  Tubingen,  1890. 


THE  LITERATURE   OF  SOCIALISM.  101 

of  conservative  tendencies,  who  is  regarded  as  one  of  the 
leaders  of  the  state  socialists.  There  can  be  little  doubt, 
however,  that  the  active  socialists  of  Germany  and  of 
other  countries  have  been  influenced  directly  by  his  writ- 
ings, the  principal  one  of  which  is  "  Zur  Beleuchtung 
cler  Sozialen  Frage,"  but  "  Das  Kapital "  may  also  be  men- 
tioned. The  other  writer  is  Ferdinand  Lassalle,  who,  un- 
like Rodbertus,  entered  actively  into  the  working-class 
agitation.  Ferdinand  Lassalle  played  an  important  part 
in  the  formation  of  a  working-class  party  in  Germany, 
but  what  was  peculiar  in  his  thought  and  his  methods 
has  finally  been  rejected  by  the  social  democratic  party, 
which,  nevertheless,  holds  him  in  honor.  A  complete 
collection  of  his  writings  has  been  prepared  under  the 
auspices  of  the  party,  and  edited  by  one  of  its  leaders, 
namely,  Eduard  Bernstein,  and  published  in  three  vol- 
umes in  Berlin  in  1892,  with  the  title,  "Keden  und 
Schriften."  This  edition  is  accompanied  by  notes  and 
an  introductory  essay  upon  "Lasalle  and  His  Signifi- 
cance for  the  Social  Democracy."  This  essay  and  the 
notes  are  especially  instructive,  because  they  show  the 
difference  between  the  earlier  and  the  present  socialistic 
thought  and  agitation  in  Germany. 

French  writers  seem  not  to  have  added  much  that  is 
essential  to  the  theory  of  socialism.  They  may  have 
adapted  it  better  to  French  conditions  and  French 
thought  in  working  it  over,  but  one  who  is  looking  for 
new  principles  or  new  measures  will  scarcely  find  them 
in  French  works.  French  writers  are  often  inclined  to 
lay  special  emphasis  upon  the  development  of  local  self- 
government,  but  this  can  scarcely  be  called  a  peculiar 
feature.  Among  active  French  socialist  authors,  we  may 
mention  the  son-in-law  of  Marx,  Lafargue,  who  has  writ- 


102  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  EEFORM. 

ten  a  work  on  "  The  Evolution  of  Property,"  which  has 
been  translated  into  English  and  into  German.1 

Two  French  socialist  authors  of  note,  recently  deceased, 
are  Cesar  de  Paepe  and  Benoit  Malon,  whose  most  im- 
portant theoretical  work  is,  perhaps,  "Socialisme  Inte- 
gral." The  most  important  source  of  information  in 
regard  to  French  socialistic  thought  is  found,  however, 
in  the  monthly  magazine,  La  Revue  Socialiste,  which  has 
appeared  since  1885. 

The  thought  of  Marx  was  early  presented  to  readers  in 
all  countries  and  in  all  languages  by  many  different 
authors.  Mr.  H.  M.  Hyndman,  for  example,  wrote  a 
work,  "  The  Historical  Basis  of  Socialism  in  England,"  2 
published  in  1883 ;  and  Laurence  Gronlund  wrote  "  The 
Co-operative  Commonwealth,"  in  1884,3  in  which  he  pro- 
fessed to  present  German  socialism  as  it  appeared  after 
it  had  passed  through  the  mind  of  one  who  had  learned 
to  think  and  feel  as  an  American.  These  works  appeared 
before  socialism  had  gained  much  headway,  either  in 
England  or  in  the  United  States.  They  have  influenced 
socialism  in  these  two  countries,  and  are  still  important. 

English  socialism,  as  presented  by  the  Fabians  in  the 
"  Fabian  Essays  in  Socialism," 4  has  become  emancipated 
from  the  materialistic  philosophy  of  Karl  Marx,  which, 
as  essentially  un-English  as  well  as  un-American,  could 
not  fail  to  prove  a  great  obstacle  to  the  growth  of  social- 
ism among  the  English-speaking  nations.  The  "  Fabian 
Essays  in  Socialism "  give  us  a  genuine  English  social- 

1  The  English  edition  is  published  in  Sonnenschein's  Social  Science 
Series. 

2  Kegan  Paul,  London,  Publisher.        3  Lee  &  Shepard,  Boston. 

<  Published  by  the  Fabian  Society,  276  Strand,  London,  and  by  the 
Humboldt  Publishing  Co.,  New  York. 


THE  LITERATURE   OF  SOCIALISM.  103 

ism,  practical,  straight-forward,  divorced  from  excres- 
cences which  have  no  connection  with  socialism  as  an 
industrial  system.  The  "  Fabian  Tracts  "  *  are  also  im- 
portant sources  of  information  concerning  English  social- 
istic thought  and  action.  Mr.  Sidney  Webb's  "  Socialism 
in  England"2  belongs  to  this  same  school  of  socialism 
and  must  not  be  overlooked  by  the  careful  student.  The 
periodical  organ  of  the  Fabians  is  called  Fabian  News* 

The  Social  Democratic  Federation  is  the  only  social- 
istic party  in  England,  besides  the  Fabians,  working  on 
a  national  scale.  Mr.  Hyndman  is  one  of  its  leaders, 
and,  in  addition  to  the  work  of  his  already  mentioned, 
there  may  be  added,  "The  Commercial  Crises  of  the 
Nineteenth  Century."  *  The  organ  of  this  party  is  Jus- 

1  Published  by  the  Fabian  Society,  and  can  be  had  either  separately 
or  in  bound  form. 

2  In  Sonnenschein's  Social  Science  Series,  Second  Edition,  1893. 

8  The  following  quotation  from  a  letter,  written  by  one  who  is  well 
acquainted  with  the  facts  of  the  case,  shows  the  number  of  channels 
through  which  socialism  reaches  the  English  newspaper  reading  pub- 
lic: "  With  regard  to  the  three  papers,  the  Chronicle,  the  Sun,  and  the 
Star,  copies  of  which  I  sent  you,  I  am  afraid  those  individual  num- 
bers contained  little  indication  of  their  collectivism.  I  will  try  to 
send  you  other  copies  which  contain  clearer  indications  of  the  lines 
they  adopt.  All  three  are,  of  course,  out-and-out  supporters  of  the 
Progressive  Party  in  London,  and  a  Progressive  is  of  necessity  a 
practical  socialist,  since  the  Program  adopted  by  their  party  is  that 
set  forth  in  Webb's  London  Program.  Hence  we  view  with  con- 
siderable satisfaction  the  appointment  of  Lord  Rosebery  as  Premier, 
as  he  is  an  undoubted  member  of  the  Progressive  Party,  and,  as  you 
will  have  noticed,  has  consented  to  receive  an  address  from  the  party 
in  a  few  days  at  St.  James's  Hall,  when  he  will  make  a  public  declara- 
tion on  London  affairs.  The  other  papers  referred  to  are  mostly 
rather  obscure  ones,  and  bring  out  their  socialism  in  a  somewhat  in- 
direct fashion.  Probably  fifty  or  sixty  members  of  the  Fabian  Society 
are  editors  or  journalists  of  one  sort  or  another,  and  they  let  no  oppor- 
tunity slip  of  workiiig  in  their  ideas." 

4  Souueuschein's  Social  Science  Series,  London. 


104  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

tice,1  at  present  in  its  eleventh  year.  The  party  has  also 
issued  a  series  of  social  democratic  tracts.2 

The  works  of  T.  Kirkup,  an  English  author,  deserve 
mention.  They  are,  "  An  Inquiry  into  Socialism  "  8  and 
a  "  History  of  Socialism." 4  The  significance  of  these 
books  lies  in  the  fact  that  they  give  statements  of  social- 
ism which  seem,  to  the  author  of  the  present  work,  to 
be  as  conservative  as  socialism  possibly  can  be. 

Mr.  Bellamy's  "Looking  Backward"  and  his  organ, 
The  New  Nation,  which  has  recently  ceased  to  appear, 
constitute  the  chief  sources  of  information  concerning 
American  nationalism.  The  People  is  the  English  organ 
of  the  socialistic  labor  party,  and  that,  with  the  German 
socialistic  periodical,  Die  Volks-Zeitung,  gives  full  in- 
formation concerning  the  movements  of  that  wing  of 
socialism  in  the  United  States  which  is  represented  by 
this  party. 

We  have  already  seen  that  Christian  socialism  is  some- 
thing with  varied  and  indefinite  meaning ;  but  the  litera- 
ture which  is  described  under  that  designation  is  impor- 
tant to  the  student  of  socialism,  because  it  reveals  the 
ideas  of  at  least  a  section  of  the  church  with  respect  to 
the  social  questions  of  the  day,  and  also  to  socialism 
itself.  Perhaps  one  of  the  best  works,  giving  one  a  tol- 
erably correct  picture  of  that  somewhat  vague  and  elu- 
sive spirit  called  Christian  socialism,  is  Miss  Katharine 
Pearson  Woods's  interesting  novel,  "  Metzerott,  Shoe- 
maker." 6  Another  American  work  which  is  thought  by 
some  to  give  the  best  statement  of  Christian  socialism  in 

1  Published  in  London  by  H.  Quelch,  37a  Clerkenwell  Green,  E.C. 

8  These  can  also  be  obtained  from  the  office  of  Justice. 

8  London,  Longmans,  Green,  &  Co.,  1887. 

4  London  and  Edinburgh,  Adam  and  Charles  Black,  1892. 

6  T.  Y.  Crowell  &  Co.,  Boston  and  New  York. 


THE  LITERATURE   OF  SOCIALISM.  105 

its  modern  applications  is,  "  Socialism  from  Genesis  to 
Revelation,"  by  the  Kev.  F.  M.  Sprague.  The  Eev. 
Alfred  Barry's  "  Christianity  and  Socialism  "  is  also  a 
noteworthy  book  in  this  connection.1  An  address  on 
socialism,  delivered  before  the  Hull  Church  Congress  in 
1892,  by  the  Eev.  Dr.  B.  F.  Westcott,  Bishop  of  Durham, 
should  not  be  overlooked.2  Most  important  of  all,  to 
those  who  would  keep  pace  with  socialism,  is  The  Eco- 
nomic Review,  published  quarterly  at  Oxford  by  the 
Christian  Social  Union.  Dr.  Stewart  Headlam's  monthly 
periodical,  The  Church  Reformer,  is  also  an  exponent  of 
certain  Christian  socialist  tendencies.8  The  organ  of 
Christian  socialism  in  the  United  States  is  The  Dawn, 
edited  by  the  Eev.  W.  D.  P.  Bliss,  and  published  by  the 
editor  at  Roslindale,  Mass. 

Protestant  German  Christian  socialism  has  had  two 
periods  of  activity.  The  first  centred  about  the  persons  of 
Pastor  Eudolph  Todt  and  Court  Pastor  Adolf  Stoecker, 
and  was,  to  some  considerable  extent,  the  product  of  the 
former's  celebrated  work  called,  "  Eadical  German  So- 
cialism and  Christian  Society"  (Der  radikale  deutsche 
Sozialismus  und  die  christliche  Gesellschaft,  1877).  Court 
Pastor  Stoecker  has  given  an  excellent  exposition  of 
his  views  in  his  collected  "Addresses  and  Essays."* 
The  second  period  was  the  product  of  the  awakening 
due  more  largely  than  to  any  other  work,  to  Paul  Gohre's 
remarkable  work,  "Three  Months  a  Factory  Hand,"  to 
which  reference  has  already  been  made.  The  centre 

1  Cassell,  London,  1890. 

2  Printed   as  an   appendix    to    Rev.   P.  "W.   Sprague's   Christian 
Socialism,  and  also  published  separately  by  W.  Reeves,  London,  1890. 

8  Published  by  William  Reeves,  185  Fleet  St.,  London,  E.  C. 
4  Published   under    the   title,  "  Christlich-Sozial,"  Bielefeld  and 
Leipsic,  Velhagen  &  Klasing,  1885. 


106  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

of  this  new  activity  is  found  in  the  annual  gatherings  of 
the  Evangelical  Social  Congress,  and  the  reports  of  this 
congress  furnish  information  in  regard  to  what  is  going 
forward  in  Germany  along  the  lines  of  Christian  social- 
ism under  Protestant  auspices.1  The  monographs  issued 
under  the  auspices  of  this  Evangelical  Christian  Congress 
are  also  noteworthy.2 

The  Catholics  have  of  late,  displayed  great  activity  in 
the  discussion  of  economic  questions,  and  in  this  they 
have  been  encouraged  by  Pope  Leo  XIII.,  the  discussion 
recently  turning  largely  on  his  encyclical  upon  labor. 
Naturally,  this  encyclical,  as  well  as  other  authoritative 
utterances  of  the  church,  are  variously  interpreted,  and 
the  term  Christian  socialism  is  often  applied  to  the  more 
radical  utterances  by  Roman  Catholics  dealing  with  the 
labor  problem.  The  two  most  noteworthy  prelates  in 
this  connection  are  the  late  Bishop  von  Ketteler  of 
Mainz,  and  Cardinal  Manning,  whose  activity,  however, 
was  practical  rather  than  theoretical.  The  name  of 
Cardinal  Gibbons  is  also  frequently  mentioned  in  this 
connection,8  and  his  remarkable  letter  upon  the  Knights 
of  Labor  should  not  be  overlooked  by  one  who  would 
familiarize  himself  with  the  attitude  of  the  Roman  Cath- 
olic Church  regarding  social  questions.  Probably,  how- 
ever, the  work  which  best  deserves  attention  among  all 
the  treatments  of  social  questions  from  the  Roman  Cath- 
olic standpoint,  is  still  that  one  on  the  relation  of  Chris- 
tianity to  the  la.bor  question,  written  by  Bishop  von 
Ketteler,  and  first  published  in  1864.4  The  best  concise 

1  See  Berichte  der  Evangelisch-Sozialen  Kongresse. 

2  Published  under  the  title,  Evangelisch-soziale  Zeitfragen. 
8  Appendix  XI.,  Bibliography. 

4  Arbeiterfrage  und  das  Christhenthum,  4"Auflage  mit  Einlei- 
tung  von  Windthorst 


THE  LITERATURE  OP  SOCIALISM.  107 

and  accurate  description  of  Catholic  thought  and  activity. 
in  the  direction  of  Christian  socialism,  is  found  in  an 
article  written  by  Dr.  Andr.  Brtill,  in  the  admirable  en- 
cyclopaedia of  political  science,  edited  by  Professor  Con- 
rad and  others.1 

Works  written  by  non-socialists  about  socialists  give 
us  secondary  sources  of  information  which  are  of  impor- 
tance. These  works  are  very  numerous,  and  only  a  few 
can  be  mentioned.  Emile  de  Laveleye's  "  Socialism  of 
To-day,"  translated  with  an  addition  upon  English  social- 
ism by  Mr.  Orpen,  is  one  of  the  most  important  works 
which  belong  to  this  class.  It  is  the  work  of  a  liberal 
economist  strongly  animated  by  Christian  sympathies ; 
but  as  it  was  written  some  ten  years  ago,  it  does  not  give 
an  account  of  recent  movements.  Ely's  "French  and 
German  Socialism  "  attempts  to  present  impartially  the 
main  French  and  German  systems  up  to  the  year  1883, 
when  it  appeared ;  and  in  his  "  Labor  Movement  in 
America,"  the  author  has  given  a  descriptive  account  of 
socialism  in  the  United  States.  Graham's  "  Socialism 
Old  and  New,"  is  a  recent  work,  catholic  in  spirit. 
Rae's  "  Contemporary  Socialism " 2  is  a  carefully  pre- 
pared and  scholarly  work,  but  one  which  takes  a  more 
critical  attitude  than  those  already  mentioned.  A  work 
entitled  "  A  Plea  for  Liberty  ;  An  Argument  against 
Socialism  and  Socialistic  Legislation,"  written  by  E.  S. 
Robertson,  W.  Donisthorpe,  George  Howell,  and  others, 
with  an  introduction  by  Herbert  Spencer,  is  a  work 
which  takes  a  decidedly  more  antagonistic  spirit  with 

1  See     "  Soziale    Reformbestrebungen     (Katholisch-Soziale),"     in 
Handworterbuch   der   Staatswissenschaften,  published    in   Jena,  by 
Gustav  Fisher. 

2  Second  edition,  Sonnenscliein  &  Co.,  London,  1891. 


108  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

reference  to  socialism,  and  advocates  extreme  individ- 
ualism, verging  at  times  on  anarchy.  Mr.  Mallock's 
books,  "  Social  Equality,"  "  Labour  and  the  Public  Wel- 
fare," and  others,  may  be  mentioned  among  works  takirig 
a  position  of  antagonism  to  socialism,  but  which  are 
popular  rather  than  scholarly  in  character.  Sir  James 
Fitz  james  Stephens's  "  Liberty,  Equality,  and  Frater- 
nity "  is  an  able  work  which  takes  issue  with  some  of 
the  premises  of  liberal  economics  and  socialism,  espe- 
cially as  found  in  the  writings  of  John  Stuart  Mill. 

One  of  the  most  important  earlier  treatments  of  social- 
ism is  given  by  Dr.  Rudolf  Meyer  in  his  work,  "  Der 
Emancipationskampf  des  vierten  Standes." 1  Dr.  Meyer 
wrote  this  book  frojn  the  standpoint  of  an  adherent  of 
conservative  German  politics  who  took  liberal  economic 
views.  It  is  an  accurate  description  of  the  many  phases 
of  socialism,  and  presents  liberal  extracts  from  original 
documents.  It  impresses  one  as  the  work  of  a  catholic 
and  fair-minded  man.  Dr.  Meyer  has,  in  the  present 
year,  published  a  work  in  which  he  gives  his  impres- 
sions based  upon  subsequent  experience.  It  is  entitled 
"  Der  Kapitalismus  fin  de  siecle," 2  and  it  deserves  at- 
tention. 

The  works  of  Dr.  Schaffle,  "  The  Quintessence  of 
Socialism,"  and  "  The  Impossibility  of  Social  Democracy," 
both  translated  into  English,8  are  especially  worthy  of  at- 
tention. The  first  of  the  two  attempts  to  give  a  correct 
and  colorless  statement  of  the  essential  ideas  of  social- 
ism, while  the  latter  criticises  severely  the  social  de- 
mocracy of  Germany.  It  has  been  found  difficult  by 
many  to  reconcile  the  one  work  with  the  other.  Prof. 

1  In  2  vols.,  Berlin,  1874-5.        2  Vienna  and  Leipsic,  1894. 
8  Sonnenschein's  Social  Science  Series,  London. 


THE  LITEEATURE   OF  SOCIALISM.  109 

Julius  Wolf  of  the  University  of  Zurich,  Switzerland, 
has  written  a  strongly  anti-socialistic  book  which  has 
recently  attracted  considerable  attention.  The  chief  aim 
of  it  is  to  disprove  the  law  of  evolution,  which  is  the 
main  feature  of  the  Marxist  socialism.1  While  this 
book  was  hailed  as  epoch-making  by  the  newspaper  press, 
specialists  have  felt  called  upon  to  criticise  it  with 
unusual  severity,  as  in  itself  inaccurate,  on  account  of  a 
failure  to  comprehend  socialism,  and  as  inexact  in  its 
statistics. 

A  critique  of  Marx's  socialism,  which  deserves  special 
attention,  is  that  found  in  "Die  Grundlagen  der  Karl- 
Marxschen  Kritik,"  by  Georg  Adler.2 

It  can  scarcely  be  necessary  to  add  that  all  economic 
treatises  discuss  socialism  at  greater  or  less  length  and 
more  or  less  fairly.  It  must  be  acknowledged,  howeverj 
that  the  ordinary  political  economist  has  never  taken 
the  trouble  to  master  the  socialism  which  he  attempts 
to  criticise,  and  that  the  criticisms  generally  found  in 
economic  treatises  do  not  go  beyond  truisms  and  catch- 
words, and  fail  altogether  to  reach  the  heart  of  the  sub- 
ject. There  are  numerous  exceptions,  fortunately,  and 
among  these  exceptions  special  mention  should  be  made 
of  Dr.  Adolph  Wagner,  who  in  his  "Grundlegung  der 
politischen  Oekonomie,"8  has  given  an  excellent  exposi- 
tion of  the  fundamental  principles  at  issue  in  the  discus- 
sion of  socialism. 

1  "  Sozialismus  und  kapitalistische  Gesellschaftsordnung."    Stutt- 
gart, 1892. 

2  Tubingen,  1878.  8  Third  edition,  Leipsic,  1892. 


PART   II. 

THE    STRENGTH    OF   SOCIALISM. 


PART  II. 

THE  STRENGTH  OF  SOCIALISM. 


CHAPTER  I. 
INTRODUCTORY   REMARKS. 

WE  have  now  examined  the  nature  of  socialism,  and 
we  propose  next  to  look  at  one  side  of  socialism  only, 
and  endeavor  to  ascertain  what  good  things  may  be  said 
in  its  behalf.  A  consideration  of  the  weakness  of  social- 
ism will  follow ;  but  it  seems  likely  to  promote 
clearness  of  thought  if  we  separate  the  one  from  the 
other.  When  it  is  said  that  we  want  to  ascertain  what 
strength  socialism  has,  it  does  not  signify  a  presentation 
of  socialism  such  as  that  which  an  advocate  would  give. 
An  advocate  groups  his  arguments  with  reference  to  the 
persuasion  of  those  whom  he  hopes  to  reach,  and  he  lays 
particular  emphasis  upon  that  which  will  convince  his 
audience ;  moreover,  he  appeals  to  feeling  rather  than  to 
intellect,  and  is  inclined  to  indulge  in  rhetorical  flights. 
The  purpose  of  the  scholar  who  approaches  a  subject  like 
socialism  with  perfect  impartiality  is  quite  different.  He 
examines  the  subject  calmly,  and  seeks  to  give  due  weight 
to  all  those  arguments  which  an  honest  and  intelligent 
man  must  admit  in  behalf  of  socialism.  He  does  not 
endeavor  to  persuade,  but  simply  to  enlighten ;  and  fre- 
quently those  points  which  would  be  most  effective  in  an 
advocate's  plea,  he  must  reject  altogether. 

113 


114  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

The  strength  of  socialism  may  be  considered  from  two 
standpoints.  One  may  regard  socialism  in  its  influence 
upon  the  existing  industrial  order,  and  seek  to  ascertain 
what  beneficial  effects  it  has  had,  or  is  likely  to  have, 
upon  this  order,  although  it  may  not  change  it  in  its  fun- 
damental features.  It  is  entirely  legitimate  to  take  the 
position  that  socialism  in  itself  is  not  practicable,  and 
yet  has  strength  on  account  of  its  criticism  of  present 
society,  and  also  on  account  of  suggestions  which  it 
offers  for  reform.  It  may  be  held  that  socialism  is  a 
leaven  needed  at  the  present  moment,  although  one  re- 
jects socialism  itself.  On  the  other  hand,  we  may  exam- 
ine the  strong  features  of  socialism  itself,  considered  as 
a  system  which  proposes  to  supplant  the  existing  social 
order  altogether.  Both  standpoints  must  be  taken  to 
understand  the  full  strength  of  socialism. 

Undoubtedly  one  of  the  strongest  features  of  socialism, 
considered  as  a  plan  for  an  entirely  new  industrial  soci- 
ety, is  its  all-inclusiveness.  Socialism  is  a  structure  of 
society  which  takes  in  all;  it  leaves  no  residuum,  no 
"  subm'erged  tenth."  This  all-inclusiveness  of  socialism 
appeals  strongly  to  those  who  have  been  discouraged  by 
the  patchwork  and  piecemeal  character  of  other  social 
reforms.  Take  "  trades  unionism,"  for  example  :  it  has 
benefited  great  masses  of  men,  but  it  always  leaves  be- 
hind a  wretched  class  of  unorganized  wage-earners ;  and 
even  should  it  attain  its  impossible  ideal  of  complete  or- 
ganization of  wage-earners,  it  would  still  leave  behind  the 
most  wretched  of  all ;  namely,  the  dependent  and  delin- 
quent classes.  Take  charity  organization  in  all  its  various 
forms  :  it  endeavors  to  minister  to  the  dependent  classes, 
taking  them  one  by  one ;  but  it  leaves  unreached  a  dis- 
heartening number  of  needy  and  worthy  cases.  In  fact, 


THE  STRENGTH  OF  SOCIALISM.  115 

those  whom  one  would  most  like  to  help  are  precisely 
those  most  generally  passed  over  by  charity  organiza- 
tion. The  same  holds  true  with  respect  to  all  private 
efforts  to  aid  individual  cases.  Private  effort  to  reach 
the  needy  one  by  one,  so  resembles  pouring  water  into  a 
sieve,  that  many  turn  from  it  in  despair.  Socialism  fol- 
lows the  method  of  Aristotle,  and  proceeds  from  the 
whole  to  the  part.  Its  very  structure  is  such  that  none 
are  left  out,  but  ample  room  is  found  for  the  cripple  as 
well  as  for  the  athlete,  for  the  weak  and  feeble  as  well  as 
for  the  strong  and  powerful. 


116  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 


CHAPTER  H. 

THE   STKENGTH   OF   SOCIALISM   AS   A   SCHEME    OF 
PRODUCTION. 

WHILE  socialism  originates  in  a  desire  to  bring  about 
justice  in  distribution,  it  lays  great  weight  on  the  possi- 
bilities of  increased  production  of  wealth,  which  it  prom- 
ises. Socialism  reproaches  present  society,  not  only  with 
its  very  unequal  distribution  of  wealth  actually  produced, 
but  with  its  small  production  of  wealth.  Its  adherents 
claim  that  but  a  fractional  part  of  the  wealth  which  could 
be  created  is  actually  produced  for  the  satisfaction  of 
human  needs.  This  is  well  brought  out  in  a  passage  in 
Mr.  Bellamy's  "  Looking  Backward,"  in  which  Dr.  Leete 
says  to  Mr.  West :  — 

"  I  suppose  that  no  reflection  would  have  cut  the  men  of  your 
wealth-worshipping  century  more  keenly  than  the  suggestion  that 
they  did  not  know  how  to  make  money.  .  .  .  Selfishness  was 
their  only  science,  and,  in  industrial  production,  selfishness  is 
suicide." 

The  first  strong  point  which  socialism  makes  with 
respect  to  wealth-creation,  is  that  which  provides  for  the 
suppression  of  the  wastes  of  competition.  There  can  be 
no  doubt  that  this  is  a  valid  argument.  As  socialism 
proposes  the  abolition  of  the  present  competitive  society, 
it  must  necessarily  do  away  with  the  wastes  of  competi- 
tion in  the  abolition  of  competition.  Whether  or  not  it 
brings  evils,  as  great  or  greater,  in  the  place  of  these 


THE  STRENGTH  OF  SOCIALISM.  117 

wastes,  is  an  entirely  different  question,  which  does  not 
concern  us  at  present. 

None  can  say  how  great  the  wastes  of  competition  are, 
but  a  few  illustrations  are  sufficient  to  show  that  they 
are  enormous.  Railways  in  the  United  States  afford  the 
best  illustration.  The  moment  we  begin  reflecting  upon 
wastes  in  the  railway  business,  we  are  able  to  give  con- 
crete instances  running  up  into  the  hundreds  of  millions 
of  dollars.  The  railway  lines  paralleling  the  New  York 
Central  &  Hudson  Elver  Railway,  and  the  Lake  Shore  & 
Michigan  Southern,  from  New  York  City  to  Chicago, 
afford  one  of  the  best-known  examples  of  waste  in  rail- 
way construction.  These  lines  were  built  to  compete 
with  the  older  lines  mentioned ;  but,  as  is  always  the  case 
in  such  instances,  the  competing  lines  consolidated.  The 
purpose  for  which  they  were  built  was  not  accomplished, 
and  the  expenditure  involved  in  their  construction  was  a 
national  loss.  It  has  been  estimated  that  these  lines  cost 
two  hundred  millions  of  dollars,  which  would  be  a  sum 
sufficient  to  construct  homes  for  one  million  people,  if  we 
allow  a  thousand  dollars  to  a  dwelling  for  a  family  of 
five;  and  this  is  probably  more  than  the  average  cost 
of  the  houses  of  the  people  of  the  United  States,  taking 
city  and  country  together.  We  see,  then,  that  one  single 
item  in  our  count  is  a  matter  of  national  concern ;  but 
when  we  have  mentioned  the  waste  in  construction,  we 
have  only  made  a  beginning  in  the  total  loss  involved  in 
the  construction  of  needless  railway  lines.  The  mainte- 
nance of  the  useless  lines,  and  their  continued  operation, 
involve  perpetual  loss.  Every  station  on  the  parallel 
line  involves  waste.  Every  station-agent  is  a  source  of 
expense,  and  every  needless  train  run  adds  to  the  waste. 
It  is  not  denied  that  the  parallel  railway  lines  offer  some 


118  SOCIALISM  AND   SOCIAL  HEFORM. 

slight  accommodation,  and  therefore  service,  to  the  pub- 
lic. The  new  parallel  line  will,  for  example,  generally 
run  through  a  different  part  of  the  city,  and  it  is  not 
improbable  that  the  time-table  of  the  new  parallel  line 
will  be  different  from  that  of  the  older  company,  so  that 
in  this  way  a  variety  of  trains  is  offered.  At  the  same 
time,  the  expense  is  mostly  waste,  because  a  relatively 
small  additional  expenditure  on  the  part  of  the  old 
company  would  offer  still  better  accommodations.  We 
have,  also,  not  only  to  consider  the  convenience  of  having 
stations  in  the  different  parts  of  the  city,  but  the  great 
inconvenience  which  results  from  having  different  sta- 
tions in  the  city,  the  greater  risk  to  travellers  on  the 
highway,  and  the  disfigurement  of  the  city,  which  is 
always  involved  in  a  railway  line.  Now,  what  has  taken 
place  in  the  case  of  the  West  Shore  and  the  Nickel  Plate, 
between  New  York  and  Chicago,  has  occurred  all  over 
the  United  States;  and  the  total  loss  must  amount  to 
more  than  a  thousand  millions  of  dollars,  if  we  consider 
only  the  first  cost.  If  we  consider  the  subsequent  ex- 
penditure involved,  it  becomes  truly  enormous,  —  a  loss 
like  that  brought  upon  a  nation  by  a  great  war.  It  is 
said  by  a  railway  manager,  that  even  now  it  would 
involve  an  annual  saving  of  two  hundred  millions  of 
dollars  if  the  railways  of  the  United  States  were  man- 
aged as  a  unit.  If  we  divide  the  sum  by  two,  in  order 
that  our  estimate  may  be  a  conservative  one,  and  capital- 
ize it  at  four  per  cent,  we  have  a  capital  loss  of  two 
thousand  five  hundred  millions  of  dollars.  It  is  useless 
to  attempt  any  precise  estimate,  but  it  may  not  be  an 
extravagant  estimate  if  we  claim  that  the  loss  due  to 
competition  in  the  railway  business  in  the  United  States, 
from  the  beginning  of  our  railway  history  up  to  the 


THE  STRENGTH  OF  SOCIALISM.  119 

present,  has  been  sufficient  to  furnish  all  the  people  of 
the  United  States  with  comfortable  dwellings,  provided 
that  all  the  houses  now  in  the  United  States  should  be 
destroyed.  Socialism,  then,  makes  a  very  strong  point 
when  it  shows  that  a  waste  of  this  kind  would  be  abol- 
ished with  the  abolition  of  the  competitive  system. 

The  experience  of  England  and  the  United  States,  the 
only  two  great  countries  which  have  tried  the  competi- 
tive system  in  the  telegraph  business,  is  most  instructive. 
It  is  claimed  that  the  capitalization  of  the  telegraphs  of 
the  United  States,  large  as  it  is,  does  not  exceed  the 
amount  of  capital  which  has  been  actually  invested, 
and  this  estimate  would  not  seem  to  be  an  exaggeration, 
when  we  bear  in  mind  the  fact  that,  a  little  over  a  gen- 
eration ago,  it  took  a  page  of  an  almanac  simply  to 
enumerate  the  companies  which  existed  in  this  country. 
The  Western  Union,  which  is  the  principal  company, 
and  which  has  been  the  concern  to  swallow  the  others, 
is  capitalized  at  $100,000,000.  If  we  leave  out  of  con- 
sideration any  other  company  or  companies  existing  at 
present,  and  deduct  from  the  $100,000,000  the  $20,000,- 
000  which  it  is  estimated  would  be  sufficiept  to  duplicate 
the  plant,  we  should  have  a  loss  of  $80,000,000.  This, 
however,  is  but  a  fractional  part  of  the  total  loss,  be- 
cause we  must  take  into  account  the  needless  expense 
involved  in  operating  the  plants  which  have  been  ulti- 
mately absorbed.  No  one  can  tell  what  the  total  loss  is, 
but  certainly  $100,000,000  is  an  underestimate.  Eng- 
land tried  the  competitive  system  in  the  telegraph 
business  until  about  the  year  1870,  when  she  became 
convinced  that  competition  in  this  line  of  business,  at 
any  rate,  was  a  mistake,  and  purchased  the  telegraph, 
making  it  a  part  of  the  postal  system.  Now,  the  capital 


120  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

invested  in  the  telegraph  had  grown  to  such  enormous 
proportions,  owing  to  the  number  of  companies  which 
had  been  engaged  in  business,  and  which  had  all  been 
absorbed  at  last  by  one  company,  that  it  cost  England 
nearly  as  much  to  make  the  telegraph  a  part  of  the  post- 
office  as  it  did  all  the  other  countries  of  Europe  put 
together,  because  in  these  the  telegraph  had  been  from 
the  beginning  a  part  of  the  post-office,  and  the  wastes  of 
competition  had  been  avoided. 

Gas  works  offer,  in  some  respects,  a  better  illustration 
of  the  wastes  of  competition  even  than  railways.  The 
loss  in  the  country's  industry  is  not  so  great,  but  the 
business  itself  is  simpler,  and  the  outcome  of  attempted 
competition  can  be  the  more  readily  seen.  A  develop- 
ment which  requires  decades  in  railway  business,  is  ac- 
complished in  years  in  the  gas  business.  Rival  gas 
works  in  a  city  always  consolidate,  and  monopoly  is  the 
inevitable  outcome  of  competition,  and  loss  to  the  city  at- 
tempting competition  will  be  equal  to  the  capital  wasted 
in  all  the  unsuccessful  attempts  which  have  been  made 
to  establish  competition  in  gas  supply.  While  there 
may  be  some  incidental  gains,  these  will  be  more  than 
off-set  by  losses  which  can  be  enumerated  in  dollars  and 
cents.  A  great  deal  of  disease  and  death  may  be  traced 
to  a  needless  tearing  up  of  the  streets  in  cities  by  rival 
companies,  and  disease  and  death  are  serious  waste. 

If  we  take  a  single  city  like  Baltimore,  and  try  to 
ascertain  the  loss  due  to  the  existence  of  competitive 
gas  companies,  we  can  form  in  our  minds  some  kind  of 
an  idea  how  enormous  the  waste  during  a  generation 
must  have  been,  when  we  remember  that  what  has  hap- 
pened in  Baltimore  has  happened  in  nearly  all  great 
American  cities.  There  have  existed  in  Baltimore  at 


THE  STRENGTH  OF  SOCIALISM.  121 

one  time  and  another,  five  or  six  different  gas  compa- 
nies ;  each  one  has  promised  the  people  of  Baltimore  the 
alleged  benefits  of  competition,  and  then,  after  a  gas 
war,  has  consolidated  with  the  old  company.  There  is 
now  in  Baltimore  one  company,  called  "The  Consoli- 
dated Gas  Company,"  with  a  capital  of  $18,000,000, 
including  bonds.  Probably  it  is  safe  to  estimate  the 
difference  between  the  capitalization  of  this  company 
and  what  it  would  cost  to  duplicate  this  plant,  as  waste 
due  to  the  competitive  system.  It  is  said  that  the  plant 
could  be  duplicated  for  less  than  $5,000,000 ;  but  if  we 
deduct  $5,000,000  and  then  $3,000,000  more,  so  as  to 
make  our  estimate  an  extremely  conservative  one,  we 
still  have  a  waste  in  this  one  city  of  $10,000,000. 

The  milk  business  is  often  adduced  by  socialists  as  an 
example  of  the  waste  due  to  competition.  In  each  city, 
every  company  or  individual  engaged  in  the  milk  busi- 
ness supplies  people  in  every  part  of  the  city,  and  the 
streets  of  each  city  are  traversed  by  a  large  number  of 
milk  wagons.  The  distribution  of  milk  in  the  city  may 
be  contrasted  with  the  distribution  of  mail.  The  deliv- 
ery of  the  mail  is  so  organized  that  each  mail  carrier  has 
a  given  district  assigned  to  him,  and  he  carries  the  mail 
to  all  persons  in  his  own  district.  The  delivery  of  milk 
might  be  compared  to  a  delivery  of  letters  and  news- 
papers without  any  system.  Let  us  suppose,  in  a  city 
like  Philadelphia,  all  the  mail,  on  arrival,  was  simply 
put  in  a  heap,  and  each  mail  carrier  should  take  up  an 
armful  for  distribution ;  it  is  manifest  that  it  would  take 
very  many  times  the  force  which  it  now  requires  to  dis- 
tribute the  mail,  because  each  mail  carrier  would  have 
to  run  all  over  the  city,  and  a  dozen  mail  carriers  would 
traverse  each  street. 


122  SOCIALISM  AND   SOCIAL   REFORM. 

Advertising  exists  for  two  purposes :  one  is  to  convey 
information,  and  the  other  is  to  acquire  a  business,  to 
hold  one's  business,  or  to  take  business  away  from  others. 
Advertising  is  like  war,  and  is,  indeed,  one  of  the  aspects 
of  industrial  conflict.  The  increasing  expenses  due  to 
advertising  may  be  compared  to  the  increasing  expenses 
due  to  standing  armies  in  Europe.  But  a  small  frac- 
tional part  of  what  is  paid  out  for  advertising  is  expendi- 
ture for  the  sake  of  conveying  useful  information.  The 
greater  part  of  it  is  necessitated  by  the  advertising  of 
one's  rivals.  The  grocer  A  spends  a  thousand  dollars  a 
year  in  advertising  of  one  sort  and  another,  and  his  rival, 
grocer  B,  spends  the  same  to  keep  his  business.  Then 
grocer  A  the  next  year,  being  what  is  called  an  enter- 
prising man,  spends  fifteen  hundred  dollars,  and  grocer 
B  spends  two  thousand  dollars.  Let  the  reader  reflect 
upon  the  enormous  expenditures  of  rival  soap  manufac- 
turers, of  which  no  part  worthy  of  mention  is  employed 
to  convey  useful  information.  To  conquer  new  territory, 
or  to  hold  its  own  against  the  attacks  of  rivals,  each  one 
of  several  great  companies  spends  enormous  amounts, 
which  can  scarcely  fail  to  run  up  into  the  hundreds  of 
thoxisands  of  dollars.  We  can  see  an  increase  in  the 
expenditures  for  advertising  of  one  sort  and  another,  and 
the  absorption  of  a  considerable  talent  and  ingenuity  in 
the  discovery  of  new  and  improved  ways  of  advertising, 
which  resemble  the  growing  expense  of  the  armies  of 
France  and  Germany,  and  the  absorption  of  talent  and 
enterprise  to  discover  new  ways  of  killing  men.  Of 
course  it  will  not  be  claimed  that  the  economic  loss  of 
advertising  is  anything  like  the  economic  loss  due  to 
standing  armies,  and  yet  it  is  by  no  means  insignificant. 
A  student 1  who  has  investigated  the  sxibject  perhaps  as 
1  Mr.  P.  M.  Magnusson. 


THE  STRENGTH  OF  SOCIALISM.  123 

» 

carefully  as  any  one,  and  the  result  of  whose  labors  it 
is  to  be  hoped  will,  at  a  not  distant  day,  be  given  to  the 
world,  estimated  the  expenses  of  advertising  in  this 
country  at  five  hundred  millions  of  dollars  a  year,  of 
which  five  millions  would  be  ample  to  convey  all  the 
useful  information  given  by  this  advertising.  Of  course 
all  this  expenditure  is  not  total  loss ;  a  part  of  it  is 
saved  by  those  to  whom  it  is  paid.  AVhat  we  have  to 
consider  from  a  social  standpoint,  is  capital  and  labor 
used  up,  which  leave  behind  no  real  utility.  If  A  trans- 
fers to  B  a  thousand  dollars,  society,  as  a  whole,  is 
neither  richer  nor  poorer.  That  does  not  represent 
social  waste.  But  if  A  spends  a  whole  day  in  work 
which  accomplishes  nothing,  or  B  consumes  to  no  purpose 
type  and  paper,  we  have  a  real  social  loss.  Economic 
energy,  which  might  have  been  so  employed  as  to  benefit 
human  beings,  has  been  simply  wasted.  Now,  a  part  of 
what  is  expended  for  advertising  represents  simply  a 
transfer  of  wealth  from  one  section  of  the  community 
to  another ;  and  some  may  be  inclined  to  hold  that  the 
estimate  itself  of  expenditure  is  a  large  one.  Should  we, 
however,  in  order  to  ascertain  the  social  loss,  feel  obliged 
to  divide  the  estimate  of  five  hundred  millions  by  five, 
we  would  still  have  a  loss  of  one  hundred  millions  of 
dollars,  which,  from  the  standpoint  of  society,  is  by  no 
means  insignificant. 

The  reader  can  continue  for  himself  illustrations  of 
this  kind.  Travelling  salesmen  will  readily  occur  as  an 
illustration  of  large  expenditure,  which  is,  to  no  incon- 
siderable extent,  waste  due  to  competition.  Of  course 
this  waste  is  allied  to  the  waste  of  advertising. 

Socialists  call  the  present  production  planless,  in  con- 
trasting production  as  a  whole  with  the  organized  system 


124  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL   REFORM. 

* 

of  a  single  great  factory.  They  propose  to  substitute 
for  present  planlessness  of  production  at  large,  regular, 
orderly,  systematic  production.  This  is  a  very  strong 
point  in  the  program  of  socialism,  and  the  gains  result- 
ing therefrom  would  be  many.  Not  the  least  important 
of  these  would  be  the  limitation  of  the  chance  element  in 
production.  The  chance  element  is  characteristic,  either 
of  production  on  a  small  scale,  or  production  imperfectly 
organized.  When  we  have  to  do  with  large  masses  of 
social  phenomena,  or  with  productive  forces  working  on 
a  vast  scale,  the  chance  element  is  reduced  to  such  low 
terms  that  it  may  be  almost  said  to  disappear.  No 
better  illustration  of  this  general  rule  can  be  offered  than 
human  mortality.  What  is  more  uncertain  than  death, 
when  we  have  regard  to  the  death  of  a  single  individual  ? 
Its  uncertainty  has  been  proverbial  from  time  immemo- 
rial. No  one  can  tell  whether  you  or  I  will  be  alive  next 
year,  next  month,  or  even  to-morrow,  yet  uncertainty  in 
regard  to  life  and  death  disappears  when  we  deal  with 
large  numbers  of  human  beings.  We  can  indeed  tell 
how  many  among  ten  millions  of  people  will  be  alive  a 
year  from  to-day,  a  month  from  to-day,  or  even  to- 
morrow, so  great  is  the  regularity  with  which  death 
occurs  among  large  masses  of  human  beings.  This  regu- 
larity is  sufficient  to  enable  us  to  build  upon  it  one  of 
the  largest  businesses  of  modern  times ;  namely,  life 
insurance,  which,  when  intelligently  conducted,  by  no 
means  involves  more  than  an  average  risk ;  on  the  con- 
trary, rather  less  than  average  business  risk.  Thus  it 
is  with  production.  When  we  consider  a  single  farmer 
growing  wheat  in  Minnesota,  or  a  planter  raising  corn 
in  Virginia,  the  chance  element  is  prominent.  Drought 
may  destroy  the  wheat  crop  in  Minnesota,  and  flood 


THE  STRENGTH  OF  SOCIALISM.  125 

the  corn  crop  in  Virginia.  Yet,  when  we  take  the 
country  as  a  whole,  the  fluctuations  due  to  changes  in 
seasons  and  other  causes  are  reduced  to  low  terms.  If 
the  wheat  crop  is  deficient  in  one  part  of  the  country,  it 
is  likely  to  be  abundant  elsewhere,  and  a  general  average 
maintained.  The  same  is  true  with  respect  to  other 
crops.  The  larger  the  scale  on  which  production  is  or- 
ganized, the  less  the  risk,  because  irregularities  in  one 
direction  or  the  other  are  more  likely  to  balance  one 
another.  The  reader's  imagination  will  enable  him  to 
supply  illustrations  without  limit. 

When  the  chance  element  visits  one  adversely  time 
after  time,  human  energy  suffers  impairment,  and  at 
times  becomes  almost  paralyzed.  Every  one  has  seen 
numerous  illustrations  of  the  frequent  effect  of  repeated 
but  undeserved  misfortune. 

The  present  planlessness  of  production  may  be  viewed 
from  still  another  standpoint.  At  the  present  time 
the  wheat  grower  produces  for  an  uncertain,  capricious 
market,  and  his  destiny  is  only  to  an  inconsiderable 
extent  within  his  own  control.  Farmer  A  observes  that 
the  price  of  wheat  has  been  high  for  two  or  three  years, 
and  he  thinks  that  wheat  is  a  good  crop  to  raise.  He 
begins  to  cultivate  wheat  on  a  large  scale,  but  he  does 
not  know  what  rival  producers  are  doing  or  are  going  to 
do.  Farmer  B  and  Farmer  C  and  thousands  of  others 
have  made  the  same  observation,  and  they  all  begin 
growing  wheat.  The  result  is  a  large  over-production  of 
wheat,  and  loss  to  the  producers.  Farmer  A  then  decides 
that  he  will  give  up  wheat  and  try  sheep-raising,  because 
mutton  and  wool  have  for  some  time  been  high;  but 
thousands  of  other  farmers  have  at  the  same  time  come 
to  this  conclusion,  and  sheep-raising  is  carried  too  far. 


126  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

Mutton  and  wool  fall  in  price,  and  again  there  is  loss  to 
individuals,  and  a  loss  to  society  as  a  whole,  because 
economic  energy  has  not  been  most  advantageously  ex- 
pended. The  writer  has  concrete  instances  in  mind. 
One  of  them  is  grape  culture ;  the  farmers  along  the 
shore  of  Lake  Erie,  in  western  New  York,  have  observed 
that  it  is  profitable  to  grow  table  grapes ;  and  between 
Dunkirk  in  New  York  and  Erie  in  Pennsylvania,  the 
country  is  beginning  to  assume  the  appearance  of  a 
continuous  vineyard.  Who  can  tell  what  the  results 
will  be  ?  These  growers  are  able  to  make  only  an 
uncertain  estimate  of  demand,  and  still  more  unable  are 
they  to  estimate  the  probable  supply  of  grapes  through- 
out the  country.  Here  we  have  a  very  large  expen- 
diture, continuing  through  years  with  uncertain  results. 
Many  similar  illustrations  might  be  given,  if  we  should 
turn  our  attention  to  manufacturing  industries  and  pro- 
fessional occupations,  which  afford  instances  enough  of 
misapplied  force,  due  to  a  failure  to  estimate  correctly 
supply  and  demand. 

We  may  say,  indeed,  that  the  producers  are  playing  at 
hide  and  seek  with  supply  and  demand,  and  no  one  can 
tell  what  the  outcome  of  the  game  will  be.  The  socialist 
makes  a  strong  point  when  he  bids  us  contrast  with  this 
planlessness  of  production,  resulting  in  large  loss  and 
immense  human  suffering,  the  regular,  orderly,  system- 
atic production  which  he  advocates.  He  proposes  to 
ascertain  demand,  and  organize  the  forces  of  production 
as  a  unit  to  meet  this  demand,  but  to  produce  no  more 
than  is  needed.  It  can  be  told  in  advance,  with  an 
approximation  to  accuracy,  how  many  bushels  of  wheat 
will  be  needed  in  the  United  States  the  coming  year; 
and  with  a  like  approximation  to  accuracy,  it  may  be 
told  how  -many  acres  of  wheat  will  supply  this  need. 


THE  STRENGTH  OF   SOCIALISM.  127 

Wastes  by  mistaken  undertakings  .are  a  necessary 
feature  of  the  present  competitive  order  of  society ;  but 
they  might  be  expected  to  be  largely  reduced  under 
socialism.  This  is  closely  connected  with  what  has 
preceded,  and  becomes  sufficiently  obvious  upon  reflec- 
tion. What  is  more  uncertain  than  the  result  of  a  new 
telegraph  company  or  railway  company  in  the  United 
States  ?  The  uncertainty  is  great  on  account  of  the 
presence  of  competition.  If  we  turn  our  attention,  how- 
ever, to  a  country  like  Germany,  where  there  is  no  com- 
petition in  telegraphing  or  in  the  railway  industry, 
because  both  are  government  enterprises,  we  shall  find 
that  it  is  easy  to  tell  in  advance  very  nearly  what  will 
be  the  result  of  an  extension  of  the  telegraph  or  the  rail- 
ways. It  is  possible  to  take  into  account  very  nearly  all 
the  elements  involved  in  the  calculation,  both  businesses 
becoming  relatively  simple  the  moment  the  competi- 
tive element  is  removed,  although,  with  this  element 
present,  they  are  extremely  complicated.  The  same 
holds,  although  in  less  degree,  with  respect  to  manufac- 
tures and  mercantile  undertakings.  It  has  been  claimed 
that  nine-tenths  of  the  men  who  go  into  business  in  the 
United  States  fail,  and  each  failure  represents  a  loss  of 
capital  and  of  human  energy.  Even  if,  to  be  on  the  con- 
servative side  in  our  estimate,  we  reduce  the  estimated 
number  of  failures  by  one  half,  we  still  have  a  loss 
which,  in  the  aggregate,  is  enormous. 

Another  claim  of  socialism  is  one  which,  at  a  time  like 
the  present,  is  peculiarly  effective.  It  is  maintained  that 
the  wastes  from  crises  and  industrial  depressions  will 
disappear  ;  and  this  claim  is  well  founded,  because  crises 
and  industrial  depressions  are  part  and  parcel  of  the 
competitive  system  of  ^industry,  and  would  cease  to 


128  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

afflict  society  with  the  abolition  of  the  competitive  sys- 
tem. Perhaps  we  here  touch  upon  that  loss  which  is 
chief  among  all  those  due  to  a  competitive  industrial 
order,  and  it  may  be  that  a  description  of  the  evils  inci- 
dent to  crises  and  industrial  depressions  is  as  severe  an 
indictment  of  present  society  as  can  be  brought  against 
it.  The  losses  in  a  single  year  of-  industrial  crises,  and 
consequent  industrial  stagnation,  amount  to  hundreds  of 
millions  of  dollars,  and  involve  untold  misery  to  millions 
of  human  beings.  Capital  is  idle  ;  labor  is  unemployed ; 
the  production  of  wealth  ceases ;  want  and  even  starva- 
tion come  to  thousands  ;  marriages  decrease ;  separations, 
divorces,  and  prostitution  increase  in  alarming  propor- 
tions ;  and  all  this  happens  because  the  machinery  of 
the  industrial  system  has  been  thrown  out  of  gear  by  the 
operation  of  some  force  or  another,  which,  so  far  as  we 
can  judge  from  experience,  is  an  essential  part  of  the 
order  of  competition. 

It  follows  naturally  enough  from  what  has  preceded, 
that  the  waste  due  to  idle  labor  and  idle  capital  might 
be  expected  to  cease ;  production  would  be  carried  on  for 
the  satisfaction  of  wants,  and  so  long  as  wants  remained 
there  would  be  no  reason  why  all  labor  and  all  capital 
should  not  be  employed. 

It  may  fairly  be  claimed  that  socialism  Avould  promote 
the  full  utilization  of  existing  inventions  and  industrial 
discoveries.  It  may  not  be  so  clear  that  socialism  would 
surpass  present  society  in  new  inventions  and  industrial 
discoveries,  but  there  could  not  well  be  any  opposition 
to  the  utilization  of  those  already  in  existence.  On 
account  of  the  unification  and  harmony  of  interests 
established  in  society,  there  would  necessarily  be  a  gen- 
eral desire  to  produce  material  wealth  socially  required 


THE  STRENGTH  OF  SOCIALISM.  129 

with  the  smallest  expenditure  of  economic  energy.  At 
the  present  time,  on  the  other  hand,  there  are  important 
classes  in  the  community  who  resist  the  utilization  of 
improved  machines  and  methods.  The  explanation  is, 
that  these  classes  either  actually  would  suffer,  or  they 
think  they  would  suffer,  from  that  which  would  be  a 
gain  to  society  as  a  whole.  We  have,  on  the  one  hand, 
the  wage-earners,  who  often  object  to  new  and  better 
machinery  and  improved  processes,  because  they  think 
the  result  to  them  would  be  either  lower  wages  or  entire 
loss  of  work ;  on  the  other,  the  opposition  of  capital  to 
like  improvements,  involving  serious  change  and  outlay, 
whenever  capital  has  anything  like  a  monopoly. 

All  are  familiar  with  the  destruction  of  machinery  by 
factory  operatives  in  England  early  in  this  century ; 
and  while  some  may  entertain  exaggerated  views  of  the 
extent  to  which  wage-earners  oppose  improvement,  there 
can  be  no  doubt  but  this  opposition  is  a  real  force,  and 
that  it  has  to  a  greater  or  less  degree  retarded  indus- 
trial progress.  Undoubtedly,  wage-earners  have  gener- 
ally been  mistaken  in  the  amount  of  injury  which  they 
have  anticipated  from  new  inventions  and  methods ;  but 
it  is  unquestionable  that  many  of  them  have  suffered 
temporarily,  and  some  of  them  permanently.  One  effect 
of  improvement  is  to  render  previous  skill  of  no  conse- 
quence, and  to  relegate  once  skilled  artisans  to  the  ranks 
of  unskilled  labor.  Quite  likely  society  may  gain,  but 
the  individual  suffers ;  and  who  can  help  feeling  that 
it  is  unjust  to  concentrate  the  sacrifice  of  social  change 
upon  one,  or  even  upon  a  few  ?  It  has,  indeed,  been 
proposed  by  those  not  socialists,  that  an  indemnity  should 
be  granted  to  individuals  who  suffer  on  account  of  indus- 
trial improvements,  in  order  that  the  burden  involved  in 


130  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

a  transition  from  an  inferior  to  a  superior  industrial  pro- 
cess should  be  divided  among  society  as  a  whole,  and 
not  concentrated  upon  a  few.  Manifestly,  the  difficulties 
involved  in  carrying  out  this  idea  under  our  present 
social  system  are  immense,  although  the  idea  itself  is  a 
good  one.  The  entire  question  disappears  as  a  problem 
under  socialism.  Let  us  take  the  case  of  a  communistic 
settlement  like  those  which  exist  in  different  parts  of  the 
United  States.  Can  any  ground  exist  in  such  a  commu- 
nity for  opposition  to  improvement  in  tools  or  industrial 
methods  ?  Let  us  suppose  that  some  member  of  the 
community  has  gained  great  skill  in  performing  certain 
operations  by  hand,  —  type-setting,  for  example,  —  and 
that  an  invention  is  made  in  the  community  by  the  use 
of  which  it  is  possible  for  a  child  easily  to  perform  this 
operation.  Can  the  one  who  has  acquired  the  skill 
object  ?  Scarcely :  although  his  skill  is  no  longer  of 
any  use  to  him,  he  shares  with  the  rest  of  the  com- 
munity in  the  advantages  gained  by  the  improvement; 
whereas,  if  by  a  system  of  socialism  his  interests  were 
not  identical  with  theirs,  they  would  gain  the  advan- 
tage, and  he  might  suffer  loss  through  a  reduction  in 
wages.  What  would  be  true  in  a  small  communistic 
settlement,  would  be  true  in  society  at  large,  under 
socialism. 

It  has  just  been  stated  that  it  is  not  so  clear  that 
socialism  would  lead  to  new  inventions  and  discoveries, 
as  it  is  that  it  would  promote  the  utilization  of  those 
already  in  existence.  One  exception  must  be  made. 
It  can  hardly  be  questioned  that  under  socialism  the 
inventive  powers  of  men  would  be  stimulated  to  provide 
machinery  to  do  disagreeable  work,  and  to  render  work 
now  disagreeable  as  agreeable  as  possible.  The  inveu- 


THE  STRENGTH  OF  SOCIALISM.  131 

live  power  of  man  now  aims  to  increase  the  earnings  of 
capital,  and  not  chiefly  to  render  the  task  of  the  toiler 
as  light  and  pleasant  as  possible.  Ocean  steamships 
serve  as  illustration,  and,  in  so  far  as  they  go,  as  proof. 
The  improvements  which  have  been  made  within  a  gen- 
eration to  render  an  ocean  voyage  agreeable  to  first-class 
travellers  are  remarkable.  The  ingenuity  which  has 
been  expended  in  this  direction  is  admirable,  and  the 
amount  of  capital  invested  in  these  improvements  is  very 
large.  What  has  been  done,  in  the  meantime,  to  render 
an  ocean  voyage  agreeable  to  the  stokers  and  ordinary 
sailors  ? .  Very  little.  The  reason  is  not  that  improve- 
ment is  impossible,  but  that  it  has  not  paid.  It  is  true, 
however,  that  in  proportion  as  you  make  men  valuable, 
machinery  does  disagreeable  work. 

Now,  it  is  the  essence  of  socialism  to  insist  upon  the 
value  of  man ;  and  it  is  evident  that  this  new  order 
could  not  fail  to  result  in  a  new  class  of  inventions  and 
discoveries.  Even  now  we  can  say  that  the  amount  of 
economic  energy  expended  in  lightening  menial  toil  is 
precisely  in  proportion  to  the  value  which  attaches  to 
the  ordinary  man  or  woman. 

An  advertisement  (of  what  is  technically  called  the 
"  before  and  after  "  kind)  which  attracted  the  author's 
attention  some  time  since,  is  significant.  It  was  simply 
an  advertisement  of  a  mop ;  but  as  a  naturalist  can  con- 
struct from  a  single  bone  a  likeness  of  an  extinct  ani- 
mal, so  a  sociologist,  sufficiently  skilful,  could  tell  us 
a  good  deal  about  the  kind  of  society  in  which  this 
advertisement  appeared.  The  advertisement  gave  two 
pictures;  one  of  an  ordinary  mop,  out  of  which  the 
water  was  being  wrung  by  a  bedrabbled,  sorry-looking 
maid,  and  the  other  of  a  smiling,  comely  housewife,  who 


132  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  EEFORM, 

was  wringing  the  dirty  water  out  of  the  mop  by  simply 
turning  the  handle.  This  method  of  extracting  the  dirty 
water,  without  soiling  one's  hands,  was  the  essential 
feature  of  the  patented  mop.  Now,  of  course,  the  author 
knows  nothing  about  the  merits  of  this  mop,  but  he 
claims  that  the  advertisement  itself,  of  the  alleged  im- 
provement, signifies  a  great  deal.  It  is  significant  that 
the  advertisement  appeared  in  the  United  States,  where 
women's  wages  are  high,  and  many  women  of  respecta- 
bility do  their  own  house  work,  and  not  in  Germany, 
where  labor  is  cheap  and  servants  abundant.  It  is 
significant  that  improvements  of  this  kind  should  be 
more  abundant  in  the  North  than  in  the  South.  Equally 
significant  is  the  undoubted  fact  that  the  tools  used 
by  the  slaves  in  the  South  were  of  an  inferior  kind. 
The  Northern  farmer,  who  hoed  his  own  Indian  corn, 
used  a  beautifully  constructed  hoe,  weighing  a  few 
ounces,  and  despised  the  heavy  and  clumsy  tool  used 
by  the  Southern  slave  in  the  field.  Equally  significant 
is  the  fact  that,  when  it  was  made  illegal  to  send  chim- 
ney sweeps  down  chimneys  in  England,  the  chimneys 
were  still  swept,  but  by  improved  tools,  and  not  by  boys 
in  the  chimneys  themselves.1 

The  author  spent  some  time  among  the  Shakers  at 
Mount  Lebanon,  New  York,  and  was  much  pleased  to 
see  the  improvements  which  had  been  introduced  in  the 
kitchen,  rendering  kitchen  work  so  agreeable  that  the 
sisters  preferred  it  to  any  other  occupation.  One  thing 
which  he  remembers  is  that  the  soiled  clothes  were 
washed  by  the  aid  of  water-power.  Now,  what  did  all 
these  unusual  improvements  in  the  kitchen  signify,  ex- 

1  This  last  illustration  is  given  by  Mrs.  Annie  Besant  in  the  Fabian 
Essays. 


THE  STRENGTH  OF  SOCIALISM.  133 

cept  that  the  community  of  interests  resulted  in  the 
devotion  of  a  larger  proportion  than  usual  of  the  in- 
ventive talent  and  energy  of  this  social  group  to  occu- 
pations ordinarily  termed  menial  ? 

It  may  further  be  urged  -in  behalf  of  socialism,  that 
under  socialism  all  forces  will  work  together  for  a  large 
product,  whereas,  at  the  present  time,  powerful  forces 
are  not  infrequently  striving  for  a  diminished  produc- 
tion of  wealth.  The  reason  for  the  condition  of  things 
which  exists  at  the  present,  becomes  obvious  when  we 
reflect  upon  the  fact  that  production  is  carried  OD  for 
exchange,  and  that  what  the  producers  want  is  not 
abundance  of  commodities,  but  large  values.  The  two 
are  by  no  means  identical,  for  value  depends  upon  limita- 
tion of  supply.  If  the  supply  of  commodities  could  be 
sufficient  to  satisfy  all  wants,  then  commodities  would 
have  no  value  at  all,  but  would  becom.e  free  like  air 
or  water. 

Wherever  it  is  practicable,  producers,  then,  must  of 
necessity,  in  a  society  like  ours,  endeavor  to  check  pro- 
duction before  diminished  value  begins  to  do  more  than 
off-set  increased  quantity.  This,  also,  explains  the  fact 
that  owners  of  commodities,  for  example,  fruits,  have 
been  known  to  destroy  a  share  of  them  in  order  to  keep 
up  value. 

Cotton,  in  the  United  States,  serves  as  an  excellent 
illustration  of  the  divergence  between  individual  or  class 
interests  and  general  social  interests.  Naturally,  society 
as  a  whole  wants  a  large  and  abundant  supply  of  cotton, 
which  furnishes  the  raw  material  of  so  many  useful  pro- 
ducts, but  an  important  section  of  the  country  has  been 
distressed  by  the  abundant  yield  of  cotton.  Southern 
planters  have  for  some  time  been  trying  to  devise  means 


134  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

to  diminish  the  production  of  cotton.  There  lie  before 
the  author  as  he  writes,  clippings  and  quotations  from 
several  newspapers.  One  of  these  describes  a  conven- 
tion of  cotton  men,  and  the  heading  is  "  Trying  to 
Wrestle  with  the  Problem  of  Over-production."  The 
article  is  a  telegraphic  despatch  dated  Memphis,  Jan.  8, 
1892,  and  it  begins  as  follows :  — 

"  That  the  farmers  of  the  South  are  in  earnest  in  their  en- 
deavor to  solve  the  serious  problem  of  over-production  of  cotton, 
is  evinced  by  the  enthusiastic  meeting  of  delegates  to  the  conven- 
tion of  the  Mississippi  Valley  Cotton  Growers'  Association,  which 
was  called  to  order  in  this  city  this  morning." 

Another  clipping  is  headed  "  Cotton  Planters :  South- 
ern Men  advocate  a  Reduction  of  the  Acreage."  A  third 
clipping  describes  a  convention  held  about  a  year  later 
at  Augusta,  Ga.  At  this  convention  a  "  cotton  area  tax  " 
was  suggested.  The  President  of  the  Boston  Cham- 
ber of  Commerce,  in  a  speech  delivered  before  a  notable 
religious  gathering  in  Washington,  referred  in  these 
words  to  the  large  production  of  cotton  in  the  South : 1  — 

"In  1890  we  harvested  a  cotton  crop  of  over  eight  million  six 
hundred  thousand  bales  —  several  hundred  thousand  bales  more 
than  the  world  could  consume.  Had  the  crop  of  the  present  year 
been  equally  large,  it  would  have  been  an  appalling  calamity  to 
the  section  of  our  country  that  devotes  so  large  a  portion  of  its 
labor  and  capital  to  the  raising  of  cotton." 

How  strange  a  thing  is  this  bounty  of  nature !  We 
wish  nature  to  be  generous,  but  not  too  generous.  If 
nature  comes  to  us  with  smiling  face  and  outstretched 

1  The  Hon.  Alden  ^neare.  President  of  the  Boston  Chamber  of 
Commerce,  Address  on  Labor  and  Capital,  before  the  Ecumenical 
Conference  of  the  Methodist  Church  in  Washington,  D.C.,  as  re- 
ported in  the  Baltimore  American,  Oct.  17,  1891. 


THE  STRENGTH  OF  SOCIALISM.  135 

arms,  and  pours  into  our  laps  her  gifts  without  stint,  she 
impoverishes  us,  and  we  hardly  know  whether  to  dread 
the  more  an  excess  of  niggardliness  or  an  excess  of  gen- 
erosity on  her  part.  So  full  of  contradictions  is  our  pres- 
ent economic  order,  that  men  must  go  without  coats 
because  too  much  clothing  has  been  produced,  and  chil- 
dren must  go  hungry  because  the  production  of  grain 
has  been  over-abundant.  As  the  socialists  have  said, 
with  some  measure  of  truth,  "  In  civilization  poverty  is 
born  of  plenty." 

As  socialism  proposes  that  production  should  be  car- 
ried on  to  satisfy  wants  directly,  the  present  machinery 
for  exchange  of  commodities  would  almost  disappear,  and 
trade  and  commerce,  in  their  existing  form,  would  be 
practically  abolished.  The  plan  of  socialism  is  that 
products  should  be  gathered  into  large  central  stores, 
and  then  distributed  among  the  various  members  of  the 
community  according  to  their  claims  upon  the  income  of 
society;  in  other  words,  in  accordance  with  their  own 
individual  income.  It  is  estimated  by  Mr.  Bellamy  that 
one-eightieth  of  the  population  would  be  sufficient  to 
bring  the  goods  from  the  producer  to  the  consumer, 
whereas,  he  says,  that  one-eighth  of  the  population  is 
now  required  for  this  service.  This  would  then  mean  a 
saving  of  nine-tenths.  Whether  the  saving  would  be  so 
great  as  this  or  not,  it  is  undoubted  that  socialism,  if 
it  could  be  made  to  work,  would  require  a  far  smaller 
proportion  of  the  population  to  bring  goods  from  the 
producer  to  the  consumer  than  present  society. 

If  we  view  production  of  wealth  from  the  standpoint 
of  an  employer,  we  find  that  socialism  is  not  without  its 
strong  features.  Surely  the  employing  class  cannot  find 
its  present  relation  to  the  employed  altogether  agreeable. 


136  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

It  is  not  pleasant  to  be  engaged  in  perpetual  struggle, 
and  to  be  viewed  with  suspicion,  and  even  positive  hostil- 
ity. Many  an  employer,  weary  of  turmoil,  would  assur- 
edly welcome  a  system  which  promises  social  peace, 
although  it  might  effect  a  reduction  in  his  own  income, 
could  he  feel  convinced  that  this  new  system  was  able  to 
keep  its  promises  in  this  respect.  Working  men  may 
say  what  they  please,  but  the  lot  of  the  employer  is  too 
frequently  anything  but  an  agreeable  one,  and  that  he 
should  at  times  become  embittered,  when  he  sees  himself 
perpetually  misunderstood,  misinterpreted,  and  antago- 
nized, is  not  strange.  A  far  stronger  plea  for  socialism, 
from  the  standpoint  of  the  employer  engaged  in  produc- 
tion, might  be  made  than  one  would  be  inclined  to  be- 
lieve at  first  blush.1 

The  promises  which  socialism  holds  out  to  the  em- 

1  "  In  the  present  stage  of  human  progress,  when  ideas  of  equality 
are  daily  spreading  more  widely  among  the  poorer  classes,  and  can 
no  longer  be  checked  by  anything  short  of  the  entire  suppression  of 
printed  discussion,  and  even  of  freedom  of  speech,  it  is  not  to  be 
expected  that  the  division  of  the  human  race  into  two  hereditary 
classes,  employers  and  employed,  can  be  permanently  maintained. 
The  relation  is  nearly  as  unsatisfactory  to  the  payer  of  wages  as  to 
the  receiver.  If  the  rich  regard  the  poor  as,  by  a  kind  of  natural  law, 
their  servants  and  dependents,  the  rich  in  their  turn  are  regarded  as 
a  mere  prey  and  pasture  for  the  poor;  the  subject  of  demands  and  ex- 
pectations wholly  indefinite,  increasing  in  extent  with  every  conces- 
sion made  to  them.  The  total  absence  of  regard  for  justice  or  fairness 
in  the  relations  between  the  two  is  as  marked  on  the  side  of  the  em- 
ployed as  on  that  of  the  employers.  We  look  in  vain  among  the 
working  classes  in  general  for  the  just  pride  which  will  choose  to  give 
good  work  for  good  wages :  for  the  most  part,  their  sole  endeavor  is  to 
receive  as  much,  and  return  as  little  in  the  shape  of  service,  as  pos- 
sible. It  will  sooner  or  later  become  insupportable  to  the  employing 
classes  to  live  in  close  and  hourly  contact  with  persons  whose  inter- 
ests and  feelings  are  in  hostility  to  them."  (John  Stuart  Mill's 
"  Principles  of  Political  Economy,"  Book  IV.  chap.  vii.  §  4.) 


THE  STRENGTH  OF  SOCIALISM.  137 

ployed  are,  indeed,  alluring.  It  proposes  that  they 
should  constitute  a  fraternity,  govern  themselves  in  in- 
dustry, and  work  together  for  the  common  good.  "  No 
masters,  no  servants,"  must  have  a  welcome  sound  to 
many,  and  especially  to  those  who  now  occupy  the  sub- 
ordinate positions. 


138  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  EEFORM. 


CHAPTER  III. 

THE  STRENGTH  OP  SOCIALISM  AS  A  SCHEME  FOR  THE 
DISTRIBUTION  AND  CONSUMPTION  OF  WEALTH. 

ARISTOTLE  defended  slavery  as  an  institution  neces- 
sary to  social  progress,  maintaining  that,  unless  there 
were  a  class  of  inferiors  who  were  engaged  in  the  pro- 
duction of  material  wealth,  for  the  satisfaction  of  the 
needs  of  a  superior  class,  there  could  be  no  art,  no  litera- 
ture, no  statesmanship;  in  fact,  none  of  those  features 
of  a  high  civilization  upon  which,  ultimately,  the  general 
welfare  must  depend.  It  is  generally  admitted  that  in 
his  day  there  was  a  relative  truth,  at  least,  in  his  plea  for 
slavery.  One  passage  in  his  "  Politics  "  has  a  prophetic 
ring.  He  remarked  that  if  the  time  should  ever  come 
when  the  plectra  of  themselves  should  strike  the  lyre, 
and  the  shuttle  should  move  of  itself,  then  all  men  might 
be  free ;  but  since  his  day  invention  has  made  many  in- 
dustrial operations  well-nigh  automatic,  and  the  power  of 
man  in  production  has  been  increased  many-fold.  The 
question  suggests  itself,  cannot  the  office  of  slavery,  as  a 
foundation  of  a  high  and  worthy  civilization  for  a  few, 
be  performed  by  modern  machinery  for  all  ?  The  larger 
the  production  of  wealth,  the  stronger  the  argument  for 
socialism  in  distribution.  If  enough  could  actually  be 
produced  to  satisfy  all  the  rational  wants  of  all  human 
beings,  many  serious  objections  against  socialism  as  a 
scheme  of  distribution  would  disappear. 

It  is  well  known  that  in  certain  branches  of  industry, 


THE  STRENGTH  OF  SOCIALISM.  139 

the  power  of  man  in  production  has  been  increased  ten, 
twenty,  fifty,  one  hundred,  and  sometimes  even  a  thou- 
sand-fold. Calico  printing,  for  example,  illustrates  an 
increase  of  capacity  which  is  a  hundred-fold ;  and  in  the 
making  of  books,  it  would  be  difficult  to  say  how  many 
thousand-fold  has  been  the  increase  in  human  power,  if 
we  compare  present  methods  with  the  days  of  the  copy- 
ists, when  everything  had  to  be  written  by  hand.  When 
we  come  to  estimates  of  the  total  gain  in  man's  pro- 
ductive power,  the  uncertainty  is  great  and  estimates 
vary  widely.  A  report  of  the  Department  of  Labor  of 
the  United  States  for  1886,  states  that  the  physical 
power  of  engines  employed  in  the  mechanical  industries 
is  over  five  times  that  of  the  men  so  employed,  and  that 
it  would  require  twenty-one  millions  of  men  to  turn  out 
the  product  which,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  four  millions 
turn  out.  Robert  Owen  claimed  that  in  New  Lanark, 
Scotland,  early  in  this  century,  the  working  portion  of 
the  population  of  twenty-five  hundred  produced  as  much 
wealth  as,  one-half  a  century  before,  a  population  of  six 
hundred  thousand  could  have  produced.  Another  author 
estimates  that  the  machinery  of  the  civilized  world  per- 
forms a  service  in  production  as  great  as  could  have  been 
rendered  in  earlier  times  by  sixty  slaves  for  each  family 
of  five.  It  is  probable  that  both  of  these  latter  estimates 
are  far  too  large,  but  there  can  be  no  question  that  the 
socialists  make  a  strong  point  when  they  bring  forward 
the  increased  production  of  wealth  as  an  argument  for 
the  social  control  of  its  distribution. 

We  cannot  fail  to  commend  the  aim  of  socialism  to 
substitute  an  orderly  and  rational  distribution  of  the 
social  dividend,  for  that  based  on  a  struggle  of  private 
interests.  This  distribution,  based  upon  the  struggle  of 


140  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

private  interests,  can  satisfy  no  benevolent  person  who 
has  intelligence  enough  to  see  what  it  means. 

The  idea  of  distribution  is  the  fullest  satisfaction  of 
human  wants ;  but  at  the  present  time  very  pressing  ones 
go  unsatisfied,  while  a  few  persons  have  such  a  superfluity 
that,  to  their  own  harm,  they  can  satisfy  every  whim  and 
caprice.  You  may  find  here  a  young  girl  who  has  rare 
artistic  gifts,  which,  on  her  own  account,  as  well  as  on 
account  of  society,  it  is  desirable  she  should  be  able  to 
develop  to  the  utmost,  but  by  reason  of  poverty  her 
powers  languish,  and  she  is  obliged  to  turn  to  distasteful 
work  for  which  she  has  no  capacity;  while  on  another 
street  of  the  same  city  you  can  find  a  gilded  youth,  who, 
in  a  single  night's  debauch,  will  spend  enough  to  his  own 
undoing  to  give  our  talented  poor  girl  the  best  opportuni- 
ties which  money  can  offer.  Instances  of  this  kind  fall 
under  our  observation  every  day,  and  if  any  way  can  be 
discovered  to  remedy  this  wrong,  it  is  certainly  desirable 
that  it  should  be  known.  The  effort  to  mend  the  evil  is 
indeed  commendable. 

It  is  at  least  conceivable  that  a  distribution  of  the 
social  income  by  self-conscious  social  forces,  would  be 
productive  of  better  results,  for  the  nature  of  distribu- 
tion would  then  depend  upon  the  wisdom  and  integrity 
with  which  society  performed  its  functions  in  this  re- 
spect. Socialism,  in  its  idea,  is  unquestionably  compati- 
ble with  a  distribution  of  the  national  dividend,  which 
would  be  more  productive  of  well-being  than  is  the  distri- 
bution which  we  now  witness.  Socialism  seeks  a  dis- 
tribution which  avoids  the  extremes  of  pauperism  and 
plutocracy.  This  ideal  is  that  of  the  Bible,  as  expressed 
in  Agur's  prayer,1  "  Give  me  neither  poverty  nor  riches ; 
»  Prov.  xxx.  8,  9. 


THE  STRENGTH  OF  SOCIALISM,  141 

feed  me  with  food  convenient  for  me :  lest  I  be  full, 
and  deny  thee,  and  say,  Who  is  the  Lord  ?  or  lest  I  be 
poor,  and  steal,  and  take  the  name  of  my  God  in  vain." 
Socialists  have  directed  special  attention  to  distribution 
as  considered  from  the  standpoint  of  the  wage-earner, 
but  the  wish  for  him  is  that  he  should  cease  to  be  a 
wage-earner,  and  become  a  partner  in  production.  This 
is  implied  in  the  socialization  of  the  instruments  of  pro- 
duction ;  but  this  common  ownership  of  the  instruments 
of  production  implies  the  distribution  among  the  workers 
of  that  surplus  above  wages  which  is  now  allotted  to 
rent,  interest,  and  profits,  for  socialism  proposes  to  lay 
hold  of  these  shares  in  distribution  and  divide  them 
among  the  producers. 

Socialistic  distribution  has  also  strength  when  it  is 
viewed  from  the  standpoint  of  other  classes  than  the 
wage-earners.  The  employer,  even  if  he  may  receive  a 
smaller  share,  is  free  from  the  harrowing  cares  and  anx- 
ieties which  now  beset  him.  The  fear  that  he  may  lose 
his  entire  share  in  the  wealth  distributed,  a  fear  often 
realized  as  large  producers  annihilate  small  producers, 
ceases  to  torment  him,  for  socialism,  as  we  have  already 
seen,  provides  an  income  for  all  members  of  society.  It 
is  not  proposed  that  the  full  product  of  industry,  without 
abatement  of  any  sort,  should  go  toj  the  toiler,  because  it 
is  desired  that  a  share  should  be  set  aside  for  those  who 
are  incapable  of  themselves  engaging  in  toil,  as  well 
as  a  share  for  replacement  of  capital  and  addition  to 
capital. 

When  distribution  is  viewed  from  the  standpoint  of 
those  engaged  in  the  learned  professions,  socialism  is 
not  without  its  attractive  features.  Those  professions 
are  now  over-crowded,  largely  because  many,  better 


142  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

adapted  to  mechanical  pursuits,  endeavor  to  push  up 
into  the  learned  professions  to  escape  unpleasant  condi- 
tions attending  those  occupations  for  which  they  are 
naturally  adapted.  This  might  be  expected  to  cease,  if 
agriculture  and  mechanical  pursuits  could  be  rendered 
more  agreeable ;  and  the  anxiety  of  professional  men  for 
themselves,  and  often  their  still  greater  anxiety  for  their 
children,  would  no  longer  perplex  them  by  day  and  dis- 
turb their  rest  at  night. 

The  strength  of  socialism  as  a  scheme  for  the  con- 
sumption of  wealth,  is  closely  connected  with  what  has 
just  been  said.  The  ideal  of  socialism  is  private  frugal- 
ity and  public  luxury,  which  is  almost  the  exact  opposite 
of  current  ideals,  for  these  seem  to  favor  boundless  lux- 
ury on  the  part  of  private  individuals,  with  parsimony 
in  public  consumption.  Even  those  who  come  quite  up 
to  ordinary  ethical  standards,  do  not  seem  to  think  that 
any  justification  is  required  for  a  most  lavish  expendi- 
ture on  their  own  wants,  although  it  include  an  evening's 
entertainment  which  costs  ten  thousand  dollars,  or  a 
private  mansion  which  has  involved  an  outlay  of  half 
a  million.  Expenditures  on  entertainments  and  private 
dwellings  which  cost  many  times  the  sum  mentioned, 
do  not  offend  the  public  conscience  of  our  day.  On 
the  other  hand,  when  it  comes  to  school  buildings  or 
structures  for  state  universities,  library  buildings,  or 
art  galleries,  which  minister  to  the  needs  of  the  people 
as  a  whole,  a  legislator  who  would  cut  down  appropria- 
tions to  the  minimum  amount  and  deprive  public  build- 
ings of  all  beauty,  is  praised  and  petted  as  a  "  watch-dog 
of  the  treasury,"  while  a  president  who  uses  the  veto 
power  freely  to  defeat  appropriations  for  useful  pur- 
poses, which  have  something  else  in  view  than  the  pro- 


THE  STRENGTH  OF  SOCIALISM.  143 

motion  of  material  interests,  is  supposed  to  be  animated 
by  a  stern  sense  of  duty. 

Socialism,  fortunately,  regards  with  marked  disappro- 
bation, lavishness  on  the  part  of  private  individuals  as 
something  ethically  unjustifiable,  because  it  diverts  a 
disproportionately  large  amount  of  material  wealth  for 
the  satisfaction  of  the  few,  while  it  favors  as  commend- 
able all  that  is  best  and  highest  and  noblest  for  public 
purposes.  The  most  beautifully  laid  out  pleasure 
grounds,  the  finest  public  libraries,  grandly  housed, 
magnificent  galleries  of  art,  and  the  noblest  architec- 
ture, are  held  by  socialism  to  be  none  too  good  for  the 
people ;  because  they  find  their  best  use  when  employed 
in  the  public  service.  Which  is  the  truer  ideal  of  the 
two  ?  If  we  survey  history,  we  shall  be  inclined  to  en- 
tertain little  doubt  that  the  periods  which  meet  with 
our  most  cordial  approbation,  are  those  in  which  private 
frugality  was  commended  and  large  expenditure  for 
public  purposes  was  held  to  be  praiseworthy,  while  the 
ages  of  national  decay  have  been  ages  in  which  opposite 
ideals  and  the  reverse  practices  have  prevailed.  In  her 
best  days  Athens  employed  a  large  proportion  of  all 
public  revenues  for  art  in  its  various  forms,  and  private 
life  was  comparatively  simple,  but  in  the  time  of  the 
decay  of  Greece,  public  expenditures  declined  and  pri- 
vate luxury  grew  apace.  The  early  ages  of  Kome  consti- 
tute a  period  when  hard  work  and  simple  life  were  held 
to  honor  the  citizen,  while  the  best  which  Rome  could 
afford  was  thought  to  be  none  too  good  for  the  state. 
A  high  ideal  of  the  state  prevailed  until  the  decline  of 
Rome  began,  and  as  Rome  gradually  fell  into  decay, 
private  expenditure  increased  until  luxury  became  fairly 
wanton. 


144  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

If  we  hold  that  it  is  the  purpose  of  society  to  offer  to 
all,  so  far  as  may  be,  equal  opportunities  for  the  develop- 
ment of  all  faculties,  we  cannot  fail  to  acknowledge  that 
the  ideal  of  socialism,  with  respect  to  the  consumption  of 
wealth,  is  a  noble  one. 


THE  MORAL  STRENGTH  OF  SOCIALISM.      145 


CHAPTER  IV. 
THE    MORAL   STRENGTH    OF    SOCIALISM. 

WHILE  a  non-ethical  system  of  socialism,  based  on  a 
materialistic  conception  of  history,  has  most  unfortu- 
nately for  socialism  found  favor  on  the  part  of  a  large 
faction  of  socialists,  socialism  has  probably  found  its 
main  strength  on  its  ethical  side.  The  ethical  ideals  of 
socialism  have  attracted  to  it  generous  souls  and  have 
enlisted  in  its  ranks  its  best  adherents.  It  is  these 
ethical  ideals  which  have  inspired  the  rank  and  file  of 
the  socialistic  army  with  fiery  zeal  and  religious  devotion. 
It  may  be  said,  indeed,  that  nothing  in  the  present  day 
is  so  likely  to  awaken  the  conscience  of  the  ordinary 
man  or  woman,  or  to  increase  the  sense  of  individual 
responsibility,  as  a  thorough  course  in  socialism.  The 
study  of  socialism  has  proved  the  turning-point  in  thou- 
sands of  lives,  and  converted  self-seeking  men  and  women 
into  self-sacrificing  toilers  for  the  masses.1  The  impar- 

1  The  following  illustrations  are  offered  of  the  moral  earnestness 
produced  by  socialism  : 

"  A  young  man  employed  in  the  Central  Post-office  at  a  salary  of 
$650  a  year.  He  has  married  a  very  charming  and  able  girl,  also  a 
member.  They  occupy  two  or  three  rooms  in  a  suburban  house.  The 
young  lady  has  been  elected  as  a  guardian  of  the  poor,  the  only  woman 
among  a  number  of  men.  Her  husband  devotes  nearly  all  his  spare 
time,  after  office  hours,  to  the  society's  propaganda.  He  has  had  a 
little  portable  desk  and  stand  made  for  himself,  and  at  this  he  speaks 
at  open  spaces,  on  street  corners,  or  wherever  he  can  get  an  audience. 
His  wife  accompanies  him  and  sells  literature.  Do  not  suppose  that 
these  are  a  blatant  young  demagogue  and  a  conventional  strong- 
minded  woman.  Both  are  educated,  intelligent,  of  sweet  disposition ; 


146  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL   REFORM. 

tial  observer  can  scarcely  claim  that  the  Bible  produces 
so  marked  an  effect  upon  the  daily,  habitual  life  of  the 
average  man  and  the  average  woman  who  profess  to 
guide  their  conduct  by  it,  as  socialism  does  upon  its  ad- 
herents. The  strength  of  socialism  in  this  respect  is 
more  like  that  of  early  Christianity  as  described  in  the 
New  Testament. 

The  person  who  takes  up  socialistic  works,  having  a 
conscience  at  all  sensitive,  will  find  it  quickened  and 
stimulated  by  passage  after  passage  giving  a  new  view 
of  life,  which  is  based  upon  the  worth  of  every  human 
being.  Quotation  after  quotation  could  be  given.  Mr. 
Bellamy's  "Looking  Backward"  offers  possibility  of 
several;  but  the  following  has  impressed  the  author  of 
the  present  work  as  one  which  is  especially  strong. 
Edith,  the  heroine,  is  shocked  to  learn  that  in  the 

but  the  socialist  movement  has  taken  hold  of  them  and  given  them 
something  they  needed,  lifted  them  above  the  region  of  what  John 
Morley  calls  'greasy  domesticity,'  and  taught  them  that  there  is  a 
great  suffering  world  beyond  the  four  walls  of  home  to  be  helped  and 
worked  for.  Depend  upon  it,  a  movement  which  can  do  this  has  in 
it  some  promise  of  the  future. 

"  Or  take  the  amusing,  cynical,  remarkable  George  Bernard  Shaw, 
whose  Irish  humor  and  brilliant  gifts  have  partly  helped,  partly 
hindered,  the  society's  popularity.  This  man  will  rise  from  an  elab- 
orate criticism  of  last  night's  opera  or  Richter  concert  (he  is  the  musi- 
cal critic  of  the  World),  and  after  a  light,  purely  vegetarian  meal, 
will  go  down  to  some  far  off  club  in  South  London,  or  to  some  street 
corner  in  East  London,  or  to  some  recognized  place  of  meeting  in  one 
of  the  parks,  and  will  there  speak  to  poor  men  about  their  economic 
position  and  their  political  duties.  People  of  this  sort,  who  enjoy 
books  and  music  and  the  theatre  and  good  society,  do  not  go  down 
to  dreary  slums,  or  even  more  dreary  lecture-rooms,  to  speak  to  the 
poorer  class  of  workingmen,  without  some  strong  impelling  power; 
and  it  is  that  power,  that  motive  force,  upon  which  I  dwell,  as  show- 
ing what  is  doing  in  the  London  of  to-day."  "  The  Fabian  Society," 
by  William  Clarke,  in  New  England  Magazine  for  March,  1894. 


THE  MORAL  STRENGTH  OF  SOCIALISM.      147 

nineteenth  century  we  permitted  people  to  do  things  for 
us  which  we  despised  them  for  doing,  and  we  accepted 
services  which  we  would  have  been  unwilling  to  render. 
Dr.  Leete  explains  to  Mr.  West  the  cause  of  Edith's  sur- 
prise in  these  words :  — 

"  To  understand  why  Edith  is  surprised,  you  must  know  that 
nowadays  it  is  an  axiom  of  ethics  that  to  accept  a  service  from 
another  which  we  would  be  unwilling  to  return  in  kind  if  need 
be,  is  like  borrowing  with  the  intention  of  not  repaying;  while  to 
enforce  such  a  service  by  taking  advantage  of  the  poverty  or 
necessity  of  a  person,  would  be  an  outrage  like  forcible  robbery. 
It  is  the  worst  thing  about  any  system  which  divides  men,  or 
allows  them  to  be  divided,  into  classes  and  castes,  that  it  weakens 
the  sense  of  a  common  humanity." 

If  we  go  into  details  somewhat,  we  find  that  social- 
ism is  strong  on  its  ethical  side,  because  it  proposes  to 
make  real  the  brotherhood  of  man.  We  have  long  heard 
much  talk  about  the  brotherhood  of  man,  and  we  are  all 
aware  of  the  fact  that  a  general  belief  is  expressed  in 
this  brotherhood;  but  when  bearing  in  mind  the  pro- 
fessed doctrine  of  brotherhood,  we  observe  the  conduct 
of  brother  to  brother,  in  our  every-day  world,  we  feel  like 
exclaiming,  "  Words  !  Words ! !  Words  ! ! !  "  It  is  man- 
ifestly a  hollow  mockery,  smd,  so  far  as  any  real  service 
is  concerned,  most  of  us  would  rather  be  a  third  cousin  to 
a  man  by  blood  relationship,  than  brother  in  the  general 
and  indefinite  sense  of  the  word,  even  if  the  brother  do 
call  himself  a  Christian.  The  conduct  of  men  in  their 
economic  relations  is  anything  but  brotherly.  Socialism 
may  or  may  not  be  practicable,  but  to  it  the  brotherhood 
of  man  is  something  very  real.  The  endeavor  of  social- 
ism is  to  carry  out  the  principles  of  brotherhood  in  all 
the  relations  of  life,  by  introducing  a  social  system,  in 


148  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

which  the  maxim  shall  obtain,  "  One  for  all ;  all  for  one." 
The  central  idea  is  that  each  one  should  contribute  to 
the  common  welfare  whatever  his  strength  and  capacity 
will  permit,  and  that  none  shall  be  permitted  to  suffer 
for  the  lack  of  anything  which  he  really  needs,  provided 
the  resources  of  society  are  sufficient  to  satisfy  the  need. 

An  adequate  provision  for  the  dependent  classes  is  a 
necessary  part  of  this  proposed  system  of  brotherhood. 
This  provision  is  found,  as  we  have  already  seen,  in  the 
very  structure  of  society  itself ;  for  this  includes  what 
we  might  call  a  mutual  insurance  system  which  reaches 
every  one,  so  that  the  weak  and  infirm  and  other  indus- 
trially incapable  persons  have  a  sure  income  guaranteed 
them. 

A  passage  in  "Looking  Backward"  brings  out  the  so- 
cialist idea  with  regard  to  those  who  are  now  the  depen- 
dent classes  as  well  as  anything  which  could  be  quoted. 
Dr.  Leete  is  again  explaining  the  new  society  to  Mr. 
West,  and  these  words  are  used :  — 

'"A  solution  which  leaves  an  unaccounted-for  residuum,  is  no 
solution  at  all ;  and  our  solution  of  the  problem  of  human  society, 
would  have  been  none  at  all  had  it  left  the  lame,  the  sick,  and 
the  blind  outside  with  the  beasts  to  fare  as  they  might.  Better 
far  to  have  left  the  strong  and  yell  unprovided  for,  than  these 
burdened  ones,  toward  whom  every  heart  must  yearn,  and  for 
whom  ease  of  mind  and  body  should  be  provided,  if  for  no  others. 
Therefore,  it  is  as  I  told  you  this  morning,  that  the  title  of  every 
man,  woman,  and  child  to  the  means  of  existence,  rests  on  no 
basis  less  plain,  broad,  and  simple,  than  the  fact  that  they  are  fel- 
lows of  one  race  —  members  of  one  human  family.  The  only  coin 
current  is  the  image  of  God,  and  that  is  good  for  all  we  have. 

"  '  I  think  there  is  no  feature  of  the  civilization  of  your  epoch 
so  repugnant  to  modern  ideas  as  the  neglect  with  which  you 
treated  your  dependent  classes.  Even  if  you  had  no  pity,  no  feel- 
ing of  brotherhood,  how  was  it  that  you  did  not  see  that  you  were 


THE  MORAL  STRENGTH  OF  SOCIALISM.      149 

robbing  the  incapable  classes  of  their  plain  right,  and  leaving 
them  unprovided  for  ?  " 

"  *  I  do  not  quite  follow  you  there,'  I  said.  '  I  admit  the  claims 
of  this  class  to  our  pity,  but  how  could  they,  who  produce  nothing, 
claim  a  share  of  the  product  as  a  right  ? ' 

"  '  How  happened  it  ? '  was  Dr.  Leete's  reply,  '  that  your 
workers  were  able  to  produce  more  than  so  many  savages  would 
have  done  ?  Was  it  not  wholly  on  account  of  the  heritage  of  the 
past  knowledge  and  achievements  of  the  race,  the  machinery  of 
society,  thousands  of  years  in  contriving,  found  by  you  ready 
made  to  your  hand.  How  did  you  get  to  be  possessors  of  this 
knowledge  and  this  history,  which  represent  nine  parts  to  one 
contributed  by  yourself  in  the  value  of  your  product  ?  You  in- 
herited it,  did  you  not  ?  And  were  not  these  others,  these  unfor- 
tunate and  crippled  brothers,  whom  you  cast  out,  joint  inheritors, 
co-heirs,  with  you  ?  What  did  you  do  with  their  share  ?  Did  you 
not  rob  them  when  you  put  them  off  with  crusts,  who  were  en- 
titled to  sit  with  the  heirs,  and  did  you  not  add  insult  to  robbery, 
when  you  called  the  crusts  charity  ? '  " 

It  is  also  a  part  of  this  idea  of  brotherhood,  that  it 
contemplates  a  better  future  for  women  and  children, 
providing  for  their  ample  support,  making  marriage  a 
matter  of  affection  and  inclination  for  women,  and  not 
a  matter  of  economic  necessity,  and  providing  for  all 
children  the  opportunities  for  a  happy  childhood  and  a 
full  development  of  all  their  powers. 

It  is  a  natural  corollary  from  the  endeavor  to  make 
real  the  brotherhood  of  man  in  economic  relations,  that 
it  proposes  the  establishment  of  a  harmony  of  industrial 
interests.  It  is  thought  by  socialists,  that  the  production 
of  material  goods  for  use  rather  than  for  exchange,  will 
harmonize  the  interests  of  the  members  of  industrial 
society,  for  then  it  becomes  the  interest  of  all,  that  there 
shall  be  a  large  and  ample  production  of  material  goods 
of  the  best  quality.  Let  us  contrast  that  with  production 


150  SOCIALISM  AND   SOCIAL  REFORM. 

of  things  for  exchange.  When  things  are  produced  for 
exchange,  what  is  wanted  is  values,  and  not  quantities  of 
commodities,  as  has  been  already  stated;  but  value,  ac- 
cording to  a  well-known  law,  depends  upon  final  utility, 
or  utility  of  the  last  thing  produced,  the  result  of  which 
is  a  constant  effort  to  limit  production. 

Real  social  riches  consist  in  abundance,  but  individual 
interests  are  always  opposed  to  abundance,  in  consequence 
of  which  we  have  combinations  to  diminish  production, 
and  corners  and  rings  to  forestall  the  market,  resulting 
in  the  destruction  of  cargoes  of  East  Indian  spices  by 
the  Dutch,  and  of  fish  by  the  English  in  the  Thames, 
and  of  fruit  by  Americans  in  New  York  harbor.  The 
arrangement  which  socialism  contemplates  is  more  like 
that  which  would  hold  in  a  family  or  among  friends.  If 
there  is  abundance  and  plenty  for  all,  we  rejoice  under 
such  circumstances.  We  say  to  each  one,  "  Help  your- 
self," and  are  glad  that  we  are  able  to  do  so.  This  is 
what  happens  in  the  rural  districts  whenever  production 
is  there  carried  on  for  use  rather  than  for  exchange.  The 
Southern  planter,  before  the  war,  who  produced  apples 
or  vegetables  for  consumption  and  not  for  exchange,  was 
glad  whenever  the  yield  was  large ;  and  it  gave  him  gen- 
uine satisfaction  to  distribute  the  surplus  among  his 
friends  and  neighbors. 

The  same  law  of  scarcity  which  holds  for  commodities, 
holds  for  labor  under  our  present  system  also.  The 
price  of  labor  is  kept  up  by  making  it  scarce,  and  to  pre- 
vent an  abundant  supply  of  labor  in  the  branch  of  indus- 
try which  they  control,  is  one  of  the  purposes  of  labor 
organizations.  We  thus  have,  as  the  result  of  the  law  of 
value,  which  operates  in  present  society,  necessary  and 
universal  antagonism  of  industrial  interests.  It  is  not 


THE  MORAL   STRENGTH  OF   SOCIALISM.      151 

meant  to  say  that  absolutely  and  in  every  respect,  the 
interests  of  one  man  are  opposed  to  the  interests  of  every 
other  man,  in  present  industrial  society :  no  socialist  would 
claim  this,  but  it  is  maintained  successfully  that  there  is 
necessarily  a  large  amount  of  antagonism  of  interests. 
The  point  arises  in  competitive  production  and  distribu- 
tion, at  which  interests  diverge.  The  employer  and  em- 
ployee, for  example,  have  identical  interests  up  to  a  cer- 
tain point,  but  then  their  interests  become  more  or  less 
antagonistic.  It  is  a  praiseworthy  effort  to  attempt  the 
establishment  of  a  harmony  of  industrial  interests,  and 
the  claim  that  socialism  provides  a  harmonious  system  of 
economic  life  is  a  strong  one. 

It  becomes  clear,  from  all  this,  that  socialism  seeks  to 
establish  an  environment  favorable  to  the  development  of 
moral  qualities  in  human  beings ;  and  unless  this  feature 
of  socialism  is  carried  so  far  as  to  make  everything,  or 
nearly  everything,  depend  upon  environment,  it  is  un- 
questionably a  strong  characteristic  of  socialism.  The 
teaching  of  modern  science,  and  the  outcome  of  social 
experience  of  every  kind,  lay  greater  and  greater  stress 
upon  environment ;  and  recent  scientific  tendencies  make 
heredity  relatively  less  important,  so  far  as  ordinary 
moral  qualities  are  concerned.1 

1  The  fact  is  frequently  overlooked  that  heredity  brings  a  set  of  cir- 
cumstances with  it,  and  what  really  belongs  to  the  circumstances  is 
often  attributed  to  the  heredity.  A  change  of  circumstances  shows 
whether  a  greater  influence  is  to  be  attributed  to  the  circumstances  or 
to  the  heredity.  It  has  been  ascertained  that  ties  of  blood  and  mar- 
riage have  long  connected  a  large  proportion  of  the  criminal  and 
pauper  classes  in  the  neighborhood  of  Indianapolis,  Ind.  Those  thus 
related  have  been  called  "  The  Tribe  of  Ishmael."  Now  the  question 
in  regard  to  this  "  Tribe  of  Ishmael  "  is,  which  had  the  greater  influ- 
ence, heredity  or  circumstances?  It  is  demonstrable,  however,  in 
cases  of  this  kind,  as  well  as  in  the  slums  of  large  cities,  that  a  change 
Df  surroundings  would  produce  changed  results.  Almost  invariably  a 


152  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

Unquestionably,  favorable  environment  is  not  enough 
in  itself,  but  it  is  often  the  condition  precedent  to  im- 
provement. Preachers  whose  traditions  have  inclined 
them  to  lay  almost  exclusive  emphasis  upon  exhortation 
and  appeal  to  the  individual  conscience,  have  gradually 
come  to  see,  that  for  the  most  wretched  and  unfortunate 
classes  there  is  no  hope  without  a  change  of  environment. 
The  testimony  of  three  preachers,  of  three  different  re- 
ligious bodies,  is  important  in  this  connection.  The 
Kev.  Samuel  Barnett,  for  many  years  rector  of  St.  Jude's 
Church,  and  warden  of  Toynbee  Hall,  London,  tells  us  in 
his  work,  "Practicable  Socialism,"  that  in  the  slums  of 
cities  the  social  reformer  must  precede,  or,  at  any  rate, 
accompany,  the  preacher,  unless  the  latter  be  himself  a 
social  reformer.  Mr.  Barnett  is  a  clergyman  of  the 
established  Church  of  England;  but  a  leading  Metho- 
dist, the  Rev.  Hugh  Price  Hughes,  gives  like  testimony, 
stating  that  he  has  had  as  much  experience  in  evangel- 
istic work  as  any  man  in  England,  and  that,  in  his 
opinion,  it  is  of  no  avail  to  preach  to  hungry  men.  Gen- 
eral Booth  of  the  Salvation  Army  tells  us  plainly,  in  his 
"  Darkest  England,"  that  it  was  the  hopelessness  of  at- 
tempting to  save  the  wretched  and  outcast  population  of 
London,  the  "  submerged  tenth,"  without  a  change  in 
their  environment,  which  led  him  to  advocate  his  exten- 
sive plans  of  social  reform. 

child  taken  from  such  environment  and  placed  under  a  favorable  en- 
vironment becomes  a  moral  citizen,  whereas  had  the  old  environment 
continued,  the  child  would  probably  have  become  a  criminal  or  a  pau- 
per. Such  statistics  as  we  have  show  that  more  than  nine  out  of 
ten  children  are  saved  by  a  change  in  environment.  Heredity  would 
seem  to  have  great  weight  in  the  case  of  special  talents,  as  teachers 
have  frequent  opportunity  to  observe ;  but  so  far  as  ordinary  moral 
character  is  concerned,  circumstances  would  appear  to  be  far  more 
important. 


THE  MORAL   STRENGTH  OF  SOCIALISM.      153 

The  late  Mr.  Charles  Loring  Brace,  who,  through  the 
Children's  Aid  Society,  of  which  he  was  the  founder  and 
the  soul,  was  able  to  save  hundreds  of  thousands  of  lives, 
warns  us  against  individualistic  religious  methods  like 
tract  distribution,  as  of  no  use  in  the  slums. 

After  all,  this  is  only  a  matter  of  oidinary  common- 
sense,  based  on  ample  experience.  Every  man  feels, 
for  his  own  family,  the  importance  of  environment,  and 
he  seeks  to  bring  up  his  own  children  in  a  favorable 
environment.  A  Christian  father  of  a  family,  who  should 
leave  his  own  little  boys  and  girls  to  grow  up  in  the  slums 
of  cities,  among  thieves  and  prostitutes,  is  inconceivable. 
Any  father  of  a  family,  having  the  power  to  take  his  chil- 
dren out  of  such  environment,  and  who  should  not  do  it, 
would  be  considered  a  monstrosity.  After  all,  the  real 
reason  why  we  hear  so  much  against  environment,  is  be- 
cause the  more  fortunate  classes  desire  to  shirk  the  indi- 
vidual responsibility  which  a  true  doctrine  of  environment 
brings  to  them.  If  each  individual,  regardless  of  envi- 
ronment, has  an  equal  chance,  of  course  there  is  little 
reason  why  a  fortunately  situated  person  should  concern 
himself  about  the  wretched  inhabitants  of  the  modern 
slum,  whereas  the  true  doctrine  of  environment  lays  a 
heavy  responsibility  upon  each  one  who  is  able  in  any 
way  to  change  an  unfortunate  environment.  Socialism 
in  this,  as  in  other  respects,  helps  to  tear  off  the  mask  of 
sham  and  hypocrisy  from  modern  society. 

The  structure  of  society,  under  socialism,  would  be  such 
as  to  abolish  necessarily  the  idle  classes,  and  this  consti- 
tutes a  strong  feature  of  socialism.  No  one^  under  social- 
ism, can  gain  a  livelihood  without  personal  exertion  ;  and 
the  maxim  of  St.  Paul,  "He  who  will  not  work,  neither 
shall  he  eat,"  would  become  of  universal  application. 


154  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL   REFORM. 

At  the  present  time,  we  are  making  some  attempt  to 
abolish  idleness  on  the  part  of  poor  people,  but  we  have 
not  seriously  attacked  the  problem  of  the  idle  rich. 
Socialism  is  strong,  then,  because  it  attempts  to  abolish 
all  idle  classes,  and  idleness  is  morally  pernicious. 

Socialists  claijn  that  socialism  would  improve  and  ele- 
vate government,  and  would  raise  into  prominence  a  nobler 
class  of  men.  It  may  be  urged  that  socialism  would  im- 
prove government,  because  it  would  make  government  a 
matter  of  vital  concern  to  all  the  inhabitants  of  a  country, 
and  would  draw  into  the  service  of  the  government  all 
the  moral  strength  and  talent  of  the  country.  At  the 
present  time,  on  the  contrary,  government  is  a  matter  of 
such  minor  concern  to  large  and  influential  classes,  that 
they  neglect  it  altogether,  and  very  many  powerful  per- 
sons promote  their  economic  interests  by  the  degradation 
of  government.  Under  socialism,  the  prosperity  of  all 
would  depend  upon  the  character  of  the  socialistic  ad- 
ministration, and  socialism  could  hope  to  avail  itself  of 
the  full  mental  capacity  and  moral  strength  of  the  com- 
munity. If  socialism  could  be  made  to  work,  it  cannot 
be  said  that  its  claim,  that  it  would  bring  into  prominence 
a  nobler  class  of  men,  and  would  produce  nobler  men,  is 
unfounded.  Those  who  have  great  fortunes,  under  our 
existing  system,  have  such  positions  of  prominence  and 
power  that  they  cannot  be  ignored.  People  must  do  them 
honor,  because  they  fear  to  do  otherwise*  A  governor  of 
an  American  commonwealth  was,  not  long  ago,  reproved 
because  he  would  not  join  in  the  reception  tendered  to  an 
industrial  magnate  whose  methods  had  been  such  that  he 
could  not  give  them  his  approbation;  for  he  held  that 
these  methods,  introduced  into  the  State  of  which  he  was 
governor,  would  not  tend  to  its  development  "  in  the  line 


THE  MORAL  STRENGTH  OF  SOCIALISM.      155 

of  public  good."  His  judgment  in  regard  to  the  moral 
character  of  the  man  was  not  called  in  question,  but  he 
was  criticised  because  this  man,  held  by  many  to  be 
guilty  even  of  penitentiary  offences,  had  such  power  that 
he  could  either  help  or  injure  the  section  of  the  country 
which  he  was  visiting. 

Socialists  hold  that,  under  socialism,  elevation  to  posi- 
tions of  importance  would  be  based  upon  moral  qualifica- 
tions, in  part  at  least.  They  furthermore  urge  that  the 
nature  of  public  business  is  such  that  it  is  ennobling.  A 
great  leader  in  private  business  has  his  attention  con- 
centrated upon  himself  or  upon  a  few  stock-holders, 
whereas  public  life  enlarges  the  horizon,  and  the  right 
thinking  person  who  administers  public  business,  does  so 
with  reference  to  the  good  of  the  whole  people.  It 
may  be  justly  urged  that  it  is  public  and  not  private 
life  which  has  given  us  a  Washington,  a  Lincoln.1  The 

1  A  critic  replies  :  "  It  is  doubtless  true  that  private  service  would 
not  give  us  a  Washington  or  a  Lincoln,  and  it  is  equally  true  that 
public  service  would  not  give  us  a  Fulton,  a  Whitney,  a  Morse,  a 
Westinghouse,  or  an  Edison." 

This  is  by  no  means  clear  to  those  who  know  what  is  going  on  in 
the  laboratories  of  the  universities  in  different  parts  of  the  world. 
And  it  must  be  remembered  that,  taking  the  world  as  a  whole,  the 
greater  part  of  its  activity  is  conducted  by  those  who  are  in  the  public 
service,  namely,  the  professors  and  their  assistants  in  the  State  uni- 
versities. It  is  safe  to  say  that  those  men  who  are  named  could  not 
have  done  their  work  had  it  not  been  for  the  preliminary  work  car- 
ried on  in  the  laboratories  of  universities.  Morse  is  not  the  only 
name  to  be  mentioned  in  connection  with  the  telegraph.  Professor 
Henry's  name  also  has  an  honorable  record  as  the  inventor  of  what 
was  essential  in  the  telegraph,  and,  animated  by  the  spirit  which 
obtains  in  the  public  service  at  the  best,  he  refused  to  take  out  a 
patent.  There  are,  indeed,  those  who  do  not  recognize  the  claims  of 
Morse  to  originality  in  the  practical  application  of  the  telegraph ;  but, 
of  course,  it  is  not  necessary  for  us  to  enter  upon  a  discussion  of  this 
controverted  point.  It  is  certain  that  Morse's  work  was  based  upon 


156  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  BEFOEM. 

heroes  of  men  are  those  who  have  served  States,  and  not 
those  who  have  served  private  corporations.  This  shows 
us  why,  as  John  Stuart  Mill  pointed  out,  war,  and  not 
private  business,  has  heretofore  been  the  chief  school  of 
the  social  virtues.  War  has  an  anti-social  character,  in- 
somuch as  it  is  waged  by  one  society  of  men  against  an- 
other ;  but  it  is  carried  on  to  advance  the  interest  of  a 
country,  and  the  soldier  feels  that  he  is  struggling  for 
his  land,  and  for  it  he  is  ready  to  give  up  life  itself.  His 
occupation  cultivates  in  him  generous  habits  of  mind,  and 
a  sense  of  common  danger  draws  him  near  to  his  fellow- 
soldiers.1 

a  great  deal  of  previous  activity  of  a  public  nature.  Public  service 
has  given  us  a  Bunsen,  a  Helmholtz,  a  Virchow,  and  many  others  who 
quite  hold  their  own  with  the  names  mentioned.  What  reason  have 
we,  after  all,  to  say  that  an  Edison  would  not  have  given  us  his  best, 
had  he  worked  in  a  public  laboratory  ?  Those  who  are  familiar  with 
the  work  going  on  in  the  laboratories  of  universities,  know  that  the 
entire  time  and  strength  of  those  engaged  in  these  universities  is 
given  to  their  work,  and,  as  a  rule,  the  last  thing  of  which  they  think 
is  large  pecuniary  returns.  Professor  Babcock,  in  the  State  University 
of  Wisconsin,  invented  a  milk  tester,  which,  it  has  been  asserted,  is 
worth  to  the  State  every  year  the  entire  cost  of  the  university ;  and  a 
professor  in  the  University  of  Kansas  has  likewise,  it  is  claimed, 
made  discoveries  which  are  worth,  to  the  State  of  Kansas,  the  entire 
cost  of  that  university.  Professor  Babcock  refused  to  patent  his 
invention  because  he  did  not  think  it  was  right  for  him  to  do  so,  as  he 
was  in  the  service  of  the  State. 

However,  it  is  not  incumbent  upon  the  author  of  the  present  work, 
to  show  that  all  our  inventions  and  improvements  could  result  from 
public  life,  inasmuch  as  he  endeavors,  in  the  latter  part  of  the  book, 
to  demonstrate  the  importance  of  a  large  field  for  private  enterprise. 

1 "  Until  laborers  and  employers  perform  the  work  of  industry  in 
the  spirit  in  which  soldiers  perform  that  of  an  army,  industry  will 
never  be  moralized,  and  military  life  will  remain,  what,  in  spite  of 
the  anti-social  character  of  its  direct  object,  it  has  hitherto  been,  the 
chief  school  of  moral  co-operation." — The  Positive  Philosophy  of 
Auguste  Comte,  by  JOHN  STUART  MILL,  New  York,  1887,  p.  135. 


SOCIALISM  AS  A   PROMOTER    OF  ART.        157 


CHAPTER  V. 
SOCIALISM   AS  A   PROMOTER   OF   ART. 

IT  is  likely  to  awaken  surprise  on  the  part  of  those 
who  have  not  given  attention  to  socialism,  to  learn  that 
among  people  of  artistic  temperament,  it  meets  with 
much  favor.  Poets,  painters,  and  authors  of  talent  are 
much  inclined  to  view  socialism  with  a  certain  sympa- 
thy, and  there  are  many  of  them  who  are  even  outspoken 
in  their  adherence  to  it.  John  Ruskin  advocates  some- 
thing like  socialism,  although  of  an  aristocratic  kind ; 
and  William  Morris,  regarded  by  many  as  the  worthiest 
of  the  English  poets  to  hold  the  post  of  Poet  Laureate, 
is  not  only  a  socialist,  but  a  rather  extreme  socialist. 
Alfred  Hayes,  prominent  among  the  younger  English 
poets,  and  Walter  Crane,  the  artist,  are  members  of  the 
Fabian  Society.1  Our  own  James  Russell  Lowell  at 
one  time  said  a  good  word  in  behalf  of  socialism,  and 
probably  Mr.  W.  D.  Howells  would  no  longer  object 
to  being  classed  among  the  socialists. 

What  is  the  explanation  of  this  fact,  which  may  at 
first  seem  a  striking  and  surprising  one  ?  The  explana- 
tion is  found  in  the  unfavorable  atmosphere  for  art  and 
literature  which  is  created  by  competitive  industrialism. 
Art  can  thrive  only  when  it  is  encouraged  by  a  favorable 

1  "  The  Fabian  Society,"  by  William  Clarke,  in  the  New  England 
Magazine  for  March,  1894. 


158  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

social  environment.1  Poverty  on  the  part  of  the  many 
and  wealth  on  the  part  of  a  few,  are  alike  held  to  be  fatal 
to  the  highest  art  or  literature.  Leisure  and  moderate 
comfort  on  the  part  of  the  private  citizen,  with  a  grand 
public  life,  create  the  atmosphere  in  which  art  thrives. 
If  we  look  back  upon  the  past,  we  find  that  national  feel- 
ing in  its  expansive  periods  has  produced  a  large  part  of 
all  that  is  great  in  art  and  literature.  Three  periods  may 
be  called  to  mind :  the  age  of  Pericles,  when  Greek  art 
and  literature  achieved  grand  success ;  the  age  of  Augus- 
tus, which  was  called  the  Golden  Age ;  and  the  age  of 
Elizabeth  in  England,  which  produced  Shakespeare. 
Man  achieves  great  things  when  in  him  the  national  life 
pulsates,  and  through  him  the  nation  speaks ;  but  when 
the  national  life  is  mean,  man's  spirit  finds  no  high  plane 
of  thought  and  expression.  Architecture  achieved  its 
grandest  success  in  the  Middle  Ages,  when  national  feel- 
ing was  becoming  powerful,  and  the  age  in  which  this 
success  was  attained  was  not  peculiarly  a  commercial 
age.  It  is  often  said  in  the  United  States  that  when  we 
become  richer  we  shall  have  a  true  art ;  but  if  what  ar- 
tists tell  us  is  true,  what  art  has  to  dread  in  the  United 
States  is  a  plutocracy.  The  increase  of  wealth,  with 
present  methods  of  distribution,  would  seem  to  be  more 
likely  to  bring  danger  with  it  than  promise  to  art. 
What  is  really  wanted  is  more  leisure  and  comfort  for 
the  masses,  more  joy  in  work,  and  a  genuine  revival  of 
true  national  feeling. 

Art  is  essentially  public  and  not  private  in  its  destina- 

1  "The  hearing  ear  is  always  found  close  to  the  speaking  tongue, 
and  no  genius  can  long  or  often  utter  anything  which  is  not  invited 
or  gladly  entertained  by  men  around  hinj."  —  EMERSON:  English 
Traits,  chap,  iv.,  on  Race, 


SOCIALISM  AS  A   PROMOTER   OF  ART.         159 

tion,  and  if  it  achieves  its  grandest  success,  must  min- 
ister to  society,  and  not  to  millionaires.  This,  at  any 
rate,  is  the  socialistic  view.  One  socialistic  writer  com- 
plains that l  "  now  a  clever  workman  is  kept  at  tasks 
prescribed  by  plutocrats,  and  must  produce  baronial 
sideboards,  and  the  deft-fingered  girl  hideous  artificial 
flowers."  He  tells  us  the  gold  standards  of  plutocracy 
are  not  art  standards,  and  that  an  atmosphere  is  pro- 
duced by  competition,  and  plutocracy  resulting  there- 
from, in  which  art  cannot  thrive ;  "  that  competition  ties 
the  craftsman  hand  and  foot,  but  art  implies  indepen- 
dence." Another  socialist,  in  speaking  of  the  creed  of 
philosophic  radicalism  in  England,  which  included  clas- 
sical political  economy,  says  that : 

"  It  was  essentially  a  creed  of  Murdstones  and  Gradgrinds, 
and  the  first  revolt  came  from  the  artistic  side  ;  the  nest  of  sing- 
ing birds  of  the  lakes  would  have  none  of  it." 

Mr.  William  Morris,  in  an  article  upon  the  socialist 
ideal,2  makes  a  plea  for  socialism  from  the  standpoint 
of  art,  and  uses  these  words : 

"  The  great  mass  of  effective  art,  that  which  pervades  all  life, 
must  be  the  result  of  the  harmonious  co-operation  of  neighbors; 
and  the  rich  man  has  no  neighbors,  nothing  but  rivals  and  par- 
asites. .  .  .  When  people  once  more  take  pleasure  in  their  work, 
when  the  pleasure  rises  to  a  certain  point,  the  expression  of  it 
will  become  irresistible,  and  that  expression  of  pleasure  is  art, 
whatever  form  It  may  take." 

Mr.  Morris  says  that  we  must  abolish  the  privilege 
of  private  persons  to  destroy  the  beauty  of  the  earth 
for  their  private  advantage,  and  he  explains  that  the 

1  See  Church  Reformer,  March,  1890. 
'  See  New  Review,  January,  1891, 


160  SOCIALISM  AND   SOCIAL  REFORM. 

richest  man  has  now  license  to  injure  the  commonwealth 
to  the  full  extent  of  his  riches. 

One  of  the  most  learned  English  churchmen,  Dr.  West- 
cott,  now  Bishop  of  Durham,  writes  on  art  in  the  same 
spirit  in  his  work  on  the  Epistles  of  St.  John.  He  says 
of  Christian  art  that : 

"It  aims  not  at  a  solitary,  but  a  common  enjoyment;  it  seeks 
to  make  it  clear  that  all  to  which  it  is  directed  has  a  spiritual 
value,  able  to  command  completest  service.  ...  If  this  view  of 
art  which  has  been  given  is  correct,  its  primary  destination  is 
public,  not  private,  and  it  culminates  in  worship.  Neither  a  great 
picture  nor  a  great  poem  can  be  for  a  single  possessor;  and  so  it 
has  been  at  all  times,  when  art  has  risen  to  its  highest  triumphs. 
.  .  .  When  Greek  art  was  greatest,  it  was  consecrated  to  public 
use,  and  one  chief  danger  of  modern  society  is  lest  the  growth  of 
private  wealth  should  lead  to  the  diversion  of  the  highest  artistic 
power  from  the  common  service." 

One  of  the  best  presentations  of  art,  from  the  social- 
istic standpoint,  is  given  in  an  article  in  the  Christian 
Union  (now  The  Outlook)  for  December  17,  1893,  and  is 
entitled  "  Ideal  Art  for  the  People." 

The  following  quotation  gives  the  gist  of  the  socialistic 
thought : *  — 

"  The  art  of  the  city,  in  the  day  when  painters,  sculptors,  and 
master-singers  were  in  full  tide  of  work  and  song,  did  not  rest  in 
the  genius  of  the  few,  but  in  the  mood  of  the  many.  The  instinct 
for  beauty,  and  the  training  which  recognized  it  under  all  forms, 
were  universal ;  for  art  grows  out  of  a  deep,  rich  soil,  and  grows 

i  Mr.  Wm.  Morris  gives  an  extremely  interesting  presentation  of 
his  views  concerning  art,  in  an  address  entitled  "  Art  and  Socialism," 
published  by  W.  Reeves,  London,  1884.  A  Boston  architect,  Mr.  J. 
Pickering  Putnam,  treats  the  subject  of  architecture  in  its  relations 
to  socialism,  under  the  title  of  "Architecture  under  Nationalism,"  a 
monograph  published  by  the  Nationalist  Educational  Association, 
Boston,  189Q. 


SOCIALISM  AS  A   PROMOTER   OF  ART.        161 

only  when  such  soil  is  provided  for  it.  It  may  produce  sporadi- 
cally in  an  alien  atmosphere,  but  it  is  never  productive  of  great 
works,  on  a  great  scale,  unless  it 'is  representative  of  a  wide  popu- 
lar impulse  and  sympathy,  unless  it  is  national  or  racial.  In  this 
country,  as  in  England,  art  does  not  really  touch  our  life;  it  is  not 
yet  one  of  our  natural  forms  of  expression :  we  do  not  understand 
its  immense  importance  in  a  rich  and  rounded  civilization;  nor 
do  we  realize  how  much  we  are  losing  a  homely,  every-day  content 
and  rest.  A  real,  living  art  means  beauty  in  dress  and  habit,  joy 
in  the  manual  industries  in  the  production  of  things  sound  and 
harmonious ;  it  means  striving  for  the  ideal  in  common  occupa- 
tions, and  spiritual  and  intellectual  rest  and  delight  in  common 
work. 

"  We  think  of  art  as  a  luxury,  an  embellishment,  the  delicate 
growth  of  a  fortunate  age,  and  the  choice  work  of  a  favored  few. 
It  is  to-day,  and  in  this  country,  largely  the  possession  of  the  rich. 
Nothing  could  be  farther  from  a  true  idea  of  art  or  a  true  use  of 
it.  Great  art  is  a  sturdy,  vigorous  plant,  demanding  a  rich  soil,  a 
broad  sky,  and  free  winds ;  it  is  never  an  exotic,  to  be  nourished 
delicately  by  a  few,  and  kept  from  contact  with  the  vulgar  world. 
It  is  great  only  when  it  is  so  much  a  part  of  the  world  that  it  is 
its  most  inevitable  and  unforced  expression.  The  Greek  tragedies 
and  Shakespeare's  plays  were  part  of  the  intensest  popular  life  of 
their  time." 


162  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 


CHAPTER  VI. 
SOCIALISM   AND   PRESENT   PBOBIiEMS. 

ONE  of  the  problems  of  to-day  is  a  simplification  of 
government,  and  the  socialist  claims  that  socialism  will 
solve  this  problem.  A  certain  force  cannot  be  denied  to 
this  argument.  Laws  are  multiplied  now  without  end, 
and  it  is  extremely  difficult  to  know  what  is  and  what  is 
not  legal  under  the  complex  conditions  of  modern  life. 
It  is  also  very  hard  to  avoid  pernicious  legislation,  be- 
cause it  requires  such  incessant  watching  on  the  part  of 
well-meaning,  intelligent  citizens. 

Socialism  puts  forward  the  claim  that  it  would  reduce 
law-making  to  a  minimum,  and  would  almost  abolish 
courts.  If  one  examines  our  statute  books,  one  will  find 
that  by  far  the  greater  portion  of  legislation  concerns 
private  property  in  the  instruments  of  production,  and 
that  litigation  also  finds  its  basis  in  the  same  institution. 
Naturally  this  legislation  and  this  litigation  would  be 
abolished  with  the  abolition  of  the  institution  upon 
which  it  all  rests.  A  comparison  of  the  post-office  with 
our  American  railways  would  illustrate  this  point.  The 
law  in  regard  to  the  post-office  is  comparatively  concise 
and  simple,  and  the  post-office  seldom  figures  in  lawsuits. 
On  the  other  hand,  how -endless  is  the  legislation  con- 
cerning privately  owned  railways !  How  complex  and 
complicated  is  it!  How  continuously  does  the  private 
railway  figure  in  lawsuits!  The  administrative  problem 
under  socialism  might  become  more  difficult  than  pres- 


SOCIALISM  AND  PRESENT  PROBLEMS.        163 

ent  public  administration,  but  law  would  be  greatly  sim- 
plified, and  the  basis  of  most  litigation  before  the  courts 
would  disappear. 

But  this  is  not  all ;  how  difficult  a  problem  is  taxation  ! 
The  national  Congress  and  the  legislatures  of  forty-four 
States  and  the  municipal  authorities  of  hundreds  of 
cities  are  all  struggling  with  this  problem,  and  the 
amount  of  progress  which  has  been  accomplished  during 
the  past  generation  is  discouragingly  small.  Unques- 
tionably, our  methods  of  taxation  could  be  vastly  im- 
proved ;  but  taxation  must  ever  remain  a  difficult  problem. 
The  whole  problem,  however,  practically  disappears  under 
socialism.  With  production  socialized  it  would  only  be 
necessary  for  society  to  take  out  of  the  total  product  in 
advance  what  was  needed  for  public  purposes  before  the 
distribution  among  the  citizens  should  be  effected. 

Still  another  problem :  What  of  the  eight-hour  day  ? 
The  eight-hour  day  is  plainly  an  ideal,  but  yet  an  ex- 
tremely difficult  one  to  realize  under  present  conditions, 
look  at  it  as  we  will.  Each  man  cannot  settle  it  for  him- 
self, because  in  modern  production  those  engaged  in  the 
same  industrial  establishment  must,  as  a  rule,  work  the 
same  length  of  time ;  but  even  those  in  one  industrial 
establishment  cannot  decide  the  problem  for  themselves, 
because  they  are  under  compulsion  which  springs  from 
the  competition  of  other  industrial  establishments  in  the 
same  country  and  even  in  other  countries. 

The  eight-hour  day  has  involved  in  many  a  conflict 
employer  and  employee ;  and  yet,  unfortunately,  the  em- 
ployer is  well  nigh  as  powerless  to  effect  a  change  as  the 
employee.  Socialism,  harmonizing  industrial  interests, 
would  make  the  problem  a  comparatively  simple  one. 
The  more  men  produced,  the  more  they  would  have  to 


164  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

enjoy ;  and  it  would  remain  for  society  to  determine  on 
the  one  hand,  how  much  greater  would  be  the  production 
of  wealth  resulting  from  a  ten-hour  day  than  from  an 
eight-hour  day ;  and  second,  whether  the  additional  pro- 
duction was  more  or  less  valuable  than  the  additional 
time. 

Compulsory  education  is  another  problem  which,  at 
best,  must  occasion  difficulties  so  long  as  the  present  com- 
petitive system  endures.  It  is  a  cruel  hardship  to  chil- 
dren not  to  give  them  educational  advantages ;  but  to  do 
so  sometimes  deprives  a  dependent  parent,  for  example, 
a  widowed  mother,  of  what  she  needs  for  her  support. 
Doubtless  it  is  better  to  do  this  thin  to  allow  a  child  to 
grow  up  in  ignorance  ;  or,  at  any  rate,  it  is  better  to  pro- 
vide in  some  other  way  for  the  mother;  but  this  does 
not  render  the  problem  an  easy  one.  Yet  this  is  only  one 
of  the  difficulties  which  an  attempt  to  secure  a  universal 
education  encounters  in  actual  practice.  It  is  frequently 
found  that  the  children  in  the  schools  in  the  poorer  quar- 
ters of  the  cities  have  no  decent  clothing,  and  that  they 
are  often  unable  to  study,  because  actually  hungry. 
Compulsory  education,  then,  to  be  really  effective,  in- 
volves in  numerous  cases  the  problem  of  furnishing  food 
and  clothing  to  children  as  well  as  schools.  Manifestly, 
if  socialism  can  be  made  to  work  at  all  well,  the  difficul- 
ties of  compulsory  education  simply  disappear. 

Insurance  against  the  economic  contingencies  which 
beset  the  ordinary  man  is  one  of  the  pressing  problems 
of  the  day.  Germany  has  elaborated  a  system  under 
the  operation  of  which  some  twenty  millions  of  human 
beings  are  more  or  less  adequately  insured;  and  the 
problem  is  actively  discussed  in  every  European  country. 
It  is  only  a  matter  of  time  when  insurance  will  become 


SOCIALISM  AND  PRESENT  PROBLEMS.        165 

one  of  the  pressing  problems  of  the  day  in  the  United 
States.  Yet,  whether  we  adopt  the  German  method,  or 
one  of  the  numerous  other  methods  which  have  been 
suggested,  the  difficulties  are  immense ;  while  to  do 
nothing  will  probably  be  an  impossibility  at  no  distant 
day.  The  structure  of  society  under  socialism  is  such 
that  it  solves  the  problem. 

Private  monopoly,  with  all  its  difficulties,  manifestly 
disappears  under  socialism.  So  we  can  take  up  one 
problem  of  the  day  after  another,  and  we  shall  find  that 
socialism  provides  a  solution  for  them.  We  can  question 
whether  socialism  can  be  made  to  work  in  practice  or 
not ;  but  we  cannot  well  deny  that  if  socialism  is  practi- 
cable, it  brings  with  it  the  solution  of  these  questions. 


166  SOCIALISM  AND   SOCIAL   REFORM. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

SERVICES    WHICH   THE    AGITATION   OF   SOCIALISM 
HAS   RENDERED. 

THE  statement  has  already  been  made  that  we  may 
look  at  the  strength  of  socialism  from  two  standpoints : 
First,  frona  the  standpoint  of  a  program  of  complete 
social  reconstruction,  and  second,  from  the  standpoint  of 
socialistic  agitation.  We  pass  now  from  the  first  stand- 
point to  the  second,  and  consider  the  benefits  which  the 
agitation  of  socialism  has  brought  us. 

First,  we  may  mention  the  general  awakening  of  con- 
science, with  respect  to  social  conditions,  which  it  has 
produced.  Probably  there  never  was  a  time  when,  gen- 
erally speaking,  the  consciences  of  men  were  so  sensitive 
with  regard  to  the  lot  of  the  poor  and  unfortunate  as  at 
the  present  day  ;  and  this  is  very  largely  the  direct,  and 
also  the  indirect,  effect  of  the  activity  of  socialism,  for  it 
has  promoted  the  discussion  of  all  economic  questions 
from  an  ethical  standpoint.  Even  the  non-ethical  social- 
ism has  had  this  effect,  because  it  has  largely  lost  its 
non-ethical  character  when  it  has  been  brought  under 
the  requirements  of  practical  agitation.  What  socialism 
really  desires  is  that  the  economic  life  should  be  entirely 
subordinate  to  the  other  departments  of  social  life.  It 
wishes  leisure  and  opportunity  for  the  cultivation  of  the 
higher  faculties.  Socialism  has  thus  performed  an  im- 
portant service  in  showing  what  may,  at  least  conceiv- 
ably, be  accomplished  by  making  a  struggle  for  material 
interests  merely  a  basis  of  higher  things. 


BENEFITS  OF  AGITATION  OF  SOCIALISM.     167 

Socialism  has  aided  men  to  picture  to  themselves  an 
ideal  society,  and  has  familiarized  them  with  the  idea  of 
social  change  and  progress.  This  has  resulted  in  a  wide- 
spread desire  to  move  in  the  direction  of  the  ideal,  and  to 
approximate  it  as  nearly  as  may  be.  The  result  has  been 
that  a  needed  interest  in  economic  questions  has  been 
awakened  among  anti-socialists  as  well  as  socialists. 

Formerly  an  excessive  emphasis  was  laid  on  the  indi- 
vidual side  of  economic  life,  and  this  was  the  outcome 
of  the  individualistic  philosophy  of  the  latter  part  of  the 
eighteenth  century.  Socialism  has  laid  a  needed  empha- 
sis upon  the  social  side  of  economic  life.  When  new 
measures  and  projects  are  brought  forward,  socialism 
teaches  us  to  look  at  them  from  the  standpoint  of  society 
as  a  whole,  and  not  from  that  of  individual  promoters 
merely.  It  is  not  meant  to  be  said  that  this  was  impos- 
sible without  socialism,  but  attention  is  called  simply  to 
the  undoubted  fact  that  socialism  was  needed  to  familiar- 
ize us  with  the  point  of  view  which  one  gets  from  looking 
at  economic  questions  from  the  standpoint  of  society  as  a 
whole.  Even  up  to  the  present  day,  we,  in  the  United 
States,  are  accustomed  to  regard  projects  and  measures 
simply  from  the  standpoint  of  the  immediate  interests  of 
a  few. 

A  few  men  wish  a  charter  for  a  street  railway,  or  a 
steam  railway,  or  they  desire  the  privilege  of  furnishing 
gas  to  a  city.  It  is  evident  that  the  project  will  promote 
the  interests  of  those  immediately  concerned,  and  usually 
they  receive  what  they  desire  almost  without  conditions. 
When,  however,  enterprises  of  this  sort  are  viewed  from 
the  standpoint  of  society  as  a  whole,  we  begin  to  ask  our- 
selves whether  society  could  not  do  better  than  to  hand 
over  to  private  individuals,  cr  corporations,  such  impor- 


168  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

tant  services  without  conditions  of  any  sort.  But,  as  soon 
as  the  question  is  asked,  a  divergence  appears  between 
public  and  private  interests.  It  is  seen,  for  example, 
that  even  with  private  enterprises  it  is  better  to  have  a 
limited  than  an  unlimited  charter,  in  order  that  society 
may,  at  some  future  time,  have  the  right  to  take  hold  of 
the  enterprise,  and  manage  it  directly,  or  that  it  may  sell 
the  privilege  to  persons  willing  to  pay  for  it  its  market 
price.  Reflection  upon  the  bearings  of  such  enterprise, 
when  viewed  from  the  standpoint  of  society,  reveals, 
furthermore,  the  injustice  in  society  of  giving  away  priv- 
ileges to  a  few  persons,  which  have  a  pecuniary  signifi- 
cance, based  upon  the  fact  that  they  yield  a  surplus  over 
and  above  the  returns  to  labor  and  to  capital.  If  socialism 
had,  early  in  our  history,  familiarized  us  with  thoughts  of 
this  kind,  it  would  have  saved  to  the  people  of  the  United 
States  hundreds  of  millions  of  dollars.  The  claim  is 
made,  by  one  long  familiar  with  the  finances  of  New 
York  City,  that  the  value  of  franchises  given  away  in 
that  city,  and  thus  enriching  the  few  at  the  expense 
of  the  many,  would  be  sufficient  to  defray  all  the  ex- 
penses of  the  government  of  New  York  City.  While 
this  does  not  seem  so  bad  when  the  matter  is  viewed 
simply  from  the  standpoint  of  the  individual,  viewed 
from  the  standpoint  of  society,  it  appears  like  a  wicked 
robbery  of  the  public,  and  we  see  that  there  is  not  a 
working  woman  in  New  York  City  who  has  not  vir- 
tually been  robbed  for  the  benefit  of  a  favored  few ; 
for,  had  the  public  interest  been  guarded,  it  would  be 
easy  to  have  three-cent  street-car  fares  in  New  York  City 
or  on  each  fare  to  have  a  surplus  of  two  cents  to  be  em- 
ployed for  public  purposes,  in  the  benefits  of  which  all 
would  share.  If  we  take  up  one  class  of  undertakings 


BENEFITS   OF  AGITATION  OF  SOCIALISM.      169 

after  another,  and  view  them  from  the  standpoint  of 
socialism,  we  shall  find  light  thrown  upon  the  public 
interests.  Socialism  has  thus  a  high  educational  value. 

But  the  question  is  naturally  raised  by  socialism, 
whether  industrial  undertakings  shall  be  at  all  handed 
over  to  private  individuals  or  corporations.  Socialism 
claims  that  society,  as  a  whole,  should  provide  for  the 
satisfaction  of  economic  wants ;  and  while,  very  gener- 
ally, this  claim  has  not  been  admitted  with  reference  to 
industry  as  a  whole,  new  light  has  been  thrown  upon  the 
industrial  functions  of  government,  as  one  industry  after 
another  has  been  studied  from  the  social  standpoint. 
There  are  now  large  classes  who  will  go  at  least  part 
way  with  the  socialists.  As  the  result  of  socialism,  in 
part  at  least,  we  have  a  better  classification  of  industrial 
undertakings,  showing  us  that  these  undertakings  differ 
among  themselves  in  material  respects,  and  that  the  ad- 
vantages of  private  industry  do  not  hold  equally  for 
them  all. 

The  foregoing  is  only  one  respect  in  which  socialism 
has  modified,  fortunately,  the  older  political  economy. 
It  has  compelled  an  examination  of  the  social  order  itself. 
Older  economists  took  simply  for  granted  the  funda- 
mental features  of  the  existing  social  order.  Private 
property,  freedom  of  person,  free  contract,  and  vested  in- 
terests were  assumed  as  a  mere  matter  of  course.  Social- 
ists criticised  these  institutions,  and  the  result  has  been 
a  careful,  analytical,  and  historical  examination  of  them. 
This  examination  has  revealed  the  fact  that  they  them- 
selves are  growths,  developing  like  other  institutions, 
and  capable  of  beneficial  modifications.  The  criticisms 
of  socialism  have  also  led  to  a  re-examination  of  the  doc- 
trines of  value  and  price,  with  great  advantage  to  politi- 


170  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

cal  economy,  and  perhaps  there  is  scarcely  any  doctrine 
of  economics,  which  has  not,  to  a  greater  or  less  extent, 
been  brought  under  the  influence  of  socialism,  and  re- 
ceived beneficial  modification. 

The  agitation  of  socialism  has  had  a  tendency  to  im- 
prove government.  What  has  already  been  stated  has 
indicated  several  lines  of  reform  which  the  agitation  of 
socialism  has  promoted.  The  socialistic  platforms  are, 
as  a  rule,  divided  into  two  parts,  the  first  of  which  con- 
tains a  statement  of  the  ultimate  ideal,  and  the  second 
of  which  presents  immediate  demands.  Now,  many  of 
these  immediate  demands  are  such  that  they  have  found 
general  favor,  and  in  some  instances  acceptance. 

We  may  name  among  them  plans  to  improve  and  ex- 
tend local  self-government,  and  to  educate  the  voter ; 
also  various  measures  designed  to  improve  sanitary  con- 
ditions in  factories,  to  protect  the  life  and  health  of  the 
wage-earner,  and  to  throw  safeguards  about  women  and 
children ;  all  of  which  would  fall  under  the  general  head 
of  factory  legislation.  Everything  designed  to  purify 
government,  and  to  protect  the  ballot,  finds  support  on 
the  part  of  the  socialists.  The  socialists  are  now  in- 
clined to  take  the  position  that  what  is  needed  to  bring 
about  socialism  is  not  a  reaction  from  excessive  misery, 
but  a  strong  and  intelligent  wage-earning  population. 
If  the  reader  will  consult  various  socialistic  programs 
given  in  the  Appendix,  he  will  see  that  there  are  many 
"  immediate  demands  "  which  must  receive  general  ap- 
proval. But  this  is  not  all ;  socialism  conveys  to  the 
masses  the  idea  that  political  questions  are  far  larger 
than  personal  questions,  and  that  it  is  a  degradation  of 
government  to  make  political  questions  centre  about  the 
distribution  of  booty,  whether  that  take  the  form  of  fat 


OP  AGITATION  OF  SOCIALISM.    171 

contracts,  or  offices,  designated  in  the  parlance  of  the 
day  as  "  plums  "  or  "  snaps." 

Socialism  makes  questions  of  government  something 
far  more  than  contests  of  office-holders  and  office-seekers. 
Socialism  makes  government  real,  live,  vital,  because  it 
is  felt  that  so  much  is  at  stake  in  politics.  Perhaps 
nothing  is  more  calculated  to  improve  government  than 
a  generous  leaven  of  the  best  kind  of  socialistic  thought. 

Proof  can  be  seen  in  various  quarters.  When  the  so- 
cial democrats  gained  control  of  several  cities  in  Saxony, 
Germany,  the  excellence  of  their  administration  was 
admitted  by  all.  London,  also,  offers  remarkable  proof, 
for  socialism  has  been  largely  instrumental  in  making 
the  administration  of  London  a  model  for  all  other 
cities.  Mr.  Frederick  Harrison,  not  himself  a  socialist, 
says  that  the  London  County  Council  of  1889  "  was  the 
most  definitely  democratic  and  reforming  body  of  men 
ever  elected  in  England."  He  adds,  — 

"  The  council  has  proved  itself  the  most  economical  municipal- 
ity which  any  great  city  possesses,  or,  perhaps,  ever  had,  .  .  . 
and  is,  beyond  doubt,  the  purest  and  most  honest.  The  curse  of 
all  great  cities  is  corruption.  .  .  .  London  has  now  a  munici- 
pality which  is  absolutely  free  from  this  taint  or  even  the  suspi- 
cion of  it.  ...  The  council  is  the  first  municipal  authority  in 
this  metropolis  which  has  shown  a  steady,  earnest,  and  intelligent 
desire  to  raise  the  condition  of  the  people.  .  .  .  No  more  hon- 
est, hard-working,  zealous,  self-sacrificing  body  of  public  ser- 
vants has  ever  served  a  great  city.  No  capital  in  the  world  ever 
had  so  incorruptible  a  municipal  authority;  nor  did  any  have 
such  eminent  trained  public  servants  to  lead  it.  It  is  a  pattern 
to  the  world  for  economy,  for  industry,  for  earnestness  in  the 
cause  of  the  people." 


PART    III. 

THE    WEAKNESS  OF  SOCIALISM. 


PART   III. 

THE   WEAKNESS  OF  SOCIALISM. 


CHAPTER  I. 
INTRODUCTORY. 

SOCIALISM  is  as  strong  as  the  strongest  presentation 
which  can  be  made  of  it.  This  must  be  clearly  borne  in 
mind  by  all  students  of  the  subject,  for  in  the  course 
of  statement  and  re-statement  socialism  will  be  made 
stronger  than  any  presentation  of  it  which  has  ever  yet 
been  given.  No  impartial  person  can  deny  this,  any 
more  than  any  such  person  can  deny  that  it  has  become 
stronger  in  its  program  as  time  has  gone  on,  and  this 
program  has  been  elaborated  and  improved. 

What,  in  its  nature,  is  the  weakness  of  socialism  ? 
When  we  examine  into  this  weakness,  we  must  direct 
our  attention  to  what  is  essential  in  socialism,  and  not 
to  accidental  features  attached  to  it  by  this,  that,  or  the 
other  socialist. 

Socialism  in  England  and  America  can  be  appreciated 
in  its  full  strength  only  when  it  becomes  entirely 
emancipated  from  the  materialistic  conception  of  his- 
tory advanced  by  Karl  Marx;  for  in  neither  country 
can  socialism  meet  with  favor  when  it  finds  its  basis  in 
materialism. 

Every  modern  student  must  admit  the  great  influence 
of  economic  conditions,  especially  of  the  production,  dis- 

175 


176  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

tribution,  and  exchange  of  material  goods  upon  the  whole 
of  life ;  but  to  make  everything  depend  upon  economic 
forces,  is  shutting  one's  eyes  to  other  forces,  equally 
great  and  sometimes  greater ;  and  one  must  be  blind 
to  historical  and  actual  phenomena  who  would  make 
religion  merely  a  product  of  economic  life.  Religion  is 
an  independent  force,  often  sufficient  to  modify  and  even 
to  shape  economic  institutions.  How  can  it  be  claimed 
that  our  material  economy  is  a  cause  of  religion,  when 
we  find  religious  beliefs  so  diverse  flourishing  with  like 
economic  conditions  ?  This  is  not  the  place  to  examine 
the  philosophy  of  materialism;  but  it  can  scarcely  be 
called  an  exaggerated  statement  to  say  that  it  is  an 
antiquated  philosophy,  —  at  any  rate,  in  the  crude  form 
in  which  it  is  presented  by  Marx's  socialism. 

Similarly,  it  is  a  weakness  in  one  presentation  of 
socialism,  which  does  not  touch  the  essence  of  social- 
ism, to  make  it  depend  upon  a  precise  and  accurately 
defined  law  of  evolution,  which  is  as  inflexible  as  cast- 
iron. 

Society  is  not  an  automaton.  That  society  has  some 
option,  some  choice,  and  a  conscience  to  which  an  appeal 
can  be  made,  is  a  fact,  if  there  is  any  such  thing  as  a  fact 
at  all.  There  is  a  specious  appearance  of  strength  in 
the  claim  that  the  evolution  of  society  is  such  that 
things  must  become  worse  and  worse ;  wages  falling, 
relatively  at  least,  crises  inevitably  increasing  in  fre- 
quency and  in  severity,  and  the  concentration  of  pro- 
duction going  forward,  until  ultimately  we  must  choose 
between  private  or  public  monopoly  in  every  branch  of 
industry.  Such  a  law  of  evolution  makes  socialism  turn 
upon  the  historical  and  statistical  proof  that  can  be 
brought  forward  to  substantiate  it.  We  consequently 


THE   WEAKNESS  OF  SOCIALISM.  177 

have  whole  volumes  of  statistics,  compiled  either  to 
substantiate  or  to  refute  socialism,  when  based  upon 
this  law  of  evolution.  So  far  as  these  statistics  are 
concerned,  it  must  be  said  that  they  are  nearly  worth- 
less. Each  one  seems  to  prove  his  point,  but  it  is 
because  his  statistical  presentation  is  incomplete.  Prob- 
ably there  is  no  sufficient  statistical  record  in  existence 
to  enable  us  either  to  prove  or  to  disprove  the  Marxist 
law  of  social  evolution.  But  socialism  does  not  depend 
upon  this  law.  If  it  could  be  completely  refuted  to-mor- 
row, in  such  manner  that  every  one  would  have  to  admit 
its  refutation,  socialism  would  not  be  weakened  thereby, 
except,  perhaps,  temporarily. 

The  real  nature  of  the  question  at  issue  is  this :  Are 
there  general  tendencies  which  are  more  or  less  favorable 
to  a  socialistic  organization  of  production  and  distribu- 
tion ?  Every  one  will  admit  that  industrial  society  must, 
in  the  future,  be  shaped  with  reference  to  actual  existing 
social  forces,  although  more  than  one  outcome  of  these 
forces  is  conceivable.  Then,  if  we  decide  in  the  affirma- 
tive, as  we  must,  that  there  are  certain  social,  or,  speaking 
more  accurately,  socio-economic  forces,  working  favorably 
to  socialism,  we  have  to  decide  whether  the  socialistic 
outcome  of  this  social  evolution  is  that  which  is,  on  the 
whole,  the  more  desirable. 

A  part  of  this  so-called  scientific  law  of  social  evolution 
is  a  doctrine  of  value,  which  makes  value  depend  upon 
labor-time,  and  finds  the  profits  of  capital  and  the  source 
of  new  wealth  in  a  surplus  value  created  by  labor,  and 
filched  from  labor  by  the  capitalist.  The  scientific  cast 
which  this  law  of  value  seems  to  give  to  socialism  is 
merely  a  superficial  appearance.  Socialism  does  not 
depend  upon  a  law  of  value ;  and  the  refutation  of  any 


178  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

particular  socialistic  law  of  value  leaves  socialism,  as  a 
practical  force,  as  strong  as  it  was  before. 

The  situation  is  simply  this  :  At  the  present  time  the 
instruments  of  production  are  privately  owned,  and  indus- 
try is  privately  managed.  This  necessitates  the  exist- 
ence of  rent,  interest,  and  profits.  Manifestly,  the  entire 
product  of  industry  cannot,  under  such  conditions,  go 
to  labor,  and  there  must  be  idle  classes  living  on  rent 
and  interest.  Moreover,  the  capitalist  must,  under  exist- 
ing conditions,  receive,  in  addition  to  returns  for  personal 
exertions,  a  return  for  the  ownership  of  the  instruments 
of  production.  The  vital  questions  are :  Can  this  be  so 
changed  and  such  an  economic  organization  be  brought 
about  that  the  ownership  of  the  instruments  of  produc- 
tion will  be  vested  in  society  as  a  whole  ?  In  the  second 
place,  we  have  to  ask  the  question  whether  or  not  this  is 
desirable  even  if  it  is  practicable.  Manifestly,  the  wage- 
earner  must  like  to  add  to  his  wages  the  advantages  of 
partial  ownership  of  the  instruments  of  production ;  and 
it  is  only  natural  that  he  should  desire  to  participate  in 
the  management  of  production.  It  is  really  a  great  weak- 
ness in  a  presentation  of  socialism  to  call  rent,  interest, 
and  profits,  robbery,  although  they  are  appropriated  by 
capitalists  and  other  classes  than  wage-earners.  Natur- 
ally, the  wage-earner  cannot  be  blamed  because  he  desires 
a  reorganization  which  will  compel  all  capable  persons 
to  render  useful  personal  service,  and  to  enable  society 
as  a  whole  to  enjoy  benefits  which  now  accrue  to  the  few. 
The  Fabian  Society  in  England  has  been  able  to  exercise 
an  immense  influence  upon  English  thought,  and  a 
decided  influence  upon  English  practice,  because  it  has 
emancipated  itself  from  a  pseudo-scientific  presentation 
of  socialism,  which  was,  after  all,  full  of  revolting 
crudities. 


THE   WEAKNESS   OF  SOCIALISM.  179 

It  follows  naturally  from  what  has  been  said,  that  it  is 
not  by  any  means  necessary  to  make  socialism  a  purely 
working-class  movement.  The  question  of  socialism  is 
one  which  concerns  all  classes  of  society  ;  and  it  is  by  no 
means  evident  that  wage-earners  will  obtain  greater 
benefit  than  any  other  social  class,  if  socialism  can  be 
made  to  work  as  well  as  its  adherents  claim.  What  is 
called  an  "  all-classes  socialism  "  is  stronger  than  a  work- 
ing-class socialism.  Socialism  has  been  made  largely  a 
working-class  movement  in  Germany,  but  this  has  had 
a  most  unfortunate  effect.  Every  well-wisher  of  the 
United  States  and  England  will  hope  that  socialism,  in 
these  two  countries,  may  lack  the  narrowness  as  well 
as  the  bitterness  which  accompanies  it  if  it  becomes  a 
working-class  movement.  It  may  be  said  that  in  Ger- 
many socialism  has  tended  to  become  more  conservative 
as  the  socialistic  party  has  become  a  great  power  in  the 
land,  and  that  it  has  lost  something  of  its  working-class 
character  to  its  own  great  gain.  The  strength  that 
socialism  has,  has  largely  come  to  it  from  others  than 
wage-earners.  Marx  and  Lassalle  were  far  enough 
removed  by  birth  and  position  and  training  from  the 
wage-earning  class  of  Germany.  Liebknecht  and  Bebel, 
as  has  already  been  mentioned,  are  the  leaders  of  German 
social  democracy  to-day;  and  Liebknecht  was  once  a 
university  student,  and  Bebel  a  prosperous  manufacturer 
and  employer.  Robert  Owen,  the  earliest  English  social- 
ist, was  an  industrial  magnate ;  and  a  large  proportion  of 
the  strength  of  socialism  in  England  comes  from  men 
who  have  been  trained  at  the  English  universities.  Uni- 
versity men  also  figure  prominently  in  American  social- 
ism. Men  of  such  character  must  be  drawn  into  the 
socialist  movement  from  conscientious  motives,  if  it  is  to 


180  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

become  powerful.  The  appeal  to  self-interest  of  the 
masses  is  proper  in  its  own  place,  but  that  is  not  suffi- 
cient. The  one  who  overlooks  the  capacity  in  man  for 
self-sacrifice  and  devotion  to  others,  excludes  social  facts 
as  real  as  any  which  can  be  mentioned,  and,  moreover, 
facts  nowhere  seen  more  plainly  than  in  the  history  of 
socialism  itself. 


ALLEGED   OBJECTIONS   TO  SOCIALISM.        181 


CHAPTER  II. 
ALLEGED,  BUT  NOT  VAT.TD,  OBJECTIONS  TO  SOCIALISM. 

WHEN  we  survey  the  various  current  arguments  against 
socialism,  we  are  obliged  to  divide  them  into  two  classes. 
By  far  the  more  numerous  class  of  arguments  is  composed 
of  those  which  rest  upon  either  misapprehension  or  wilful 
misrepresentation.  They  are  not  arguments  which  can 
be  advanced  by  any  one  who  is  at  the  same  time  intelli- 
gent and  ingenuous.  Arguments  of  the  second  class, 
however,  are  arguments  which  are  advanced  by  those 
who  fully  understand  what  socialism  means,  and  feel 
that  socialism  should  be  treated  honestly.  They  consti- 
tute the  serious  objections  to  socialism,  pointing  out  the 
difficulties  which  stand  in  the  way  of  its  realization. 
Each  writer  who  is  opposed  to  socialism  will  have  a 
different  view  with  regard  to  the  weightiest  objections 
to  its  proposals.  But  it  is  the  purpose  of  the  author  of 
the  present  work  to  present  those  objections  to  socialism 
which  seem  to  him  to  have  most  weight. 

It  may  first  of  all  be  well  to  give  some  little  attention 
to  the  arguments  against  socialism  which  cannot  be 
regarded  as  valid.  Of  course,  it  would  require  a  book 
much  longer  than  the  present  work  to  take  up  one  after 
the  other  all  these  fallacious  and  misleading  arguments  ; 
but  a  few  of  the  more  common  objections  of  the  kind 
named  will  be  discussed  briefly,  by  way  of  illustration. 

When  we  survey  the  various  arguments  against  social- 


182  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

ism  in  different  countries,  we  cannot  fail  to  be  impressed 
with  the  fact  that  that  is  held  to  be  a  valid  objection  in 
one  country  which  is  not  so  regarded  in  another  country. 
An  illustration  is  afforded  by  free  public  schools.  German 
writers,  and  until  recently  English  writers,  have  regarded 
the  proposal  of  the  socialists  to  abolish  tuition  fees  as 
decidedly  objectionable.  There  may  be  differences  of 
opinion  among  Americans,  but  undoubtedly  a  vast 
majority  of  the  citizens  of  the  United  States  give  to  free 
schools  their  cordial  indorsement,  regard  them  as  one 
of  the  bulwarks  of  the  republic,  and  attack  vigorously 
any  one  who  attempts  to  undermine  them.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  idea  of  public  ownership  and  management  of 
railways  is  regarded  by  many  Americans  as  the  chief 
weakness  in  the  program  of  socialism,  while  Germans, 
as  a  rule,  regard  such  ownership  and  management  as 
something  desirable.  They  tell  us  that  the  test  of 
experience  has  settled  the  question  for  them.  These 
illustrations  suggest  caution,  and  a  careful  survey  of  the 
operation  of  existing  institutions  in  different  lands. 

The  failure  of  communistic  experiments  in  the  United 
States  and  elsewhere  is  often  urged  as  an  objection 
against  modern  socialism ;  but,  in  reality,  these  experi- 
ments, while  more  or  less  instructive,  throw  little  light 
upon  the  socialism  of  to-day.  Some  of  them  have 
succeeded;  most  of  them  have  failed.  But  had  all 
failed,  that  would  scarcely  constitute  an  argument  of 
weight  against  proposals  like  those  which  we  are  called 
upon  to  consider.  The  earlier  communism  of  this  cen- 
tury represented  ideals  which  find  their  basis  in  an 
earlier  stage  of  industrial  development ;  in  so  far,  at  any 
rate,  as  this  communism  attempted  to  propose  something 
for  universal  adoption.  The  communistic  village  based 


ALLEGED   OBJECTIONS  TO  SOCIALISM.       183 

upon  voluntary  agreement  corresponded  to  a  period  of 
production  on  a  small  scale,  when  each  large  household 
group  could  hope  to  become  economically  almost  self-suf- 
ficient. When  production  is  carried  on  on  a  vast  national 
and  international  scale,  the  socialism  proposed  must  be 
national  and  international.  The  difficulties  in  the  way 
of  a  communistic  village  are  sufficiently  apparent  when 
one  views  them  in  the  light  of  past  experience,  or  when 
one  examines  the  methods  of  production  and  distribution 
of  the  present  time.  A  communistic  village  must  be 
dependent  at  the  present  moment,  when  production  is 
carried  on  for  exchange,  upon  outsiders  who  have  no  con- 
nection with  communism,  and  who  are  often  bitterly 
opposed  to  it.  Railways  and  telegraphs  may  be  adduced 
as  simply  two  important  illustrations  of  many  which 
might  be  mentioned.  The  management  of  these  enter- 
prises, privately  owned  and  operated,  cannot  be  expected 
to  conform  to  the  requirements  of  communistic  settle- 
ments. Moreover,  such  settlements  would  not  afford  the 
freedom  of  movement  and  the  possibilities  of  organiza- 
tion and  reorganization  which  are  required  at  the  present 
day.  When  socialism  is  nationally  organized,  a  man 
can  move  about  the  country  to  find  the  place  which  is 
most  agreeable  to  him,  and  for  which  he  is  best  adapted. 
Whatever  his  talents  and  his  acquisitions,  they  are  not 
lost  to  the  socialistic  state  because  he  moves  from  one 
city  to  another.  The  condition  of  things  is  exactly  the 
reverse  in  a  communistic  village.  It  is  quite  conceivable 
that  the  man  who  is  most  essential  to  the  life  and  indus- 
tries of  such  a  village  in  the  North  may  find  it  necessary, 
on  account  of  his  health,  to  move  to  Florida,  and  he  thus 
becomes  lost  to  communism.  Moreover,  in  any  commun- 
istic village  there  will  very  likely  fail  to  be  a  right 


184  SOCIALISM  AND   SOCIAL  REFORM. 

assortment  of  men  and  women  for  industrial  organiza- 
tion. There  may  be  too  many  of  one  kind  and  too  few 
of  another,  and  it  is  not  possible  freely  to  draw  in  from 
the  outside  world,  and  to  give  to  the  outside  world,  and 
still  preserve  communism. 

These  are  simply  a  few  obvious  difficulties  in  the  way 
of  earlier  communism,  which  had  reference  perhaps  as 
much  to  the  advantages  of  associated  consumption,  as  to 
the  economies  of  production  on  a  vast  scale :  and  these  dif- 
ficulties, with  others  which  will  occur  on  reflection,  clearly 
render  the  earlier  communism  inadequate.  This  is  con- 
ceded as  freely  by  the  modern  socialist  as  by  anyone. 
Consequently  we  find  socialists  in  the  United  States  is- 
suing a  pamphlet  aiming  to  discourage  any  movement  in 
the  direction  of  a  communistic  village ;  and  the  Fabians  of 
England  steadily  setting  their  faces  against  any  separate 
settlements.  In  a  lecture  on  the  Progress  of  Collectivism, 
as  reported  in  the  Fabian  News  of  February,  1894,  Mr. 
Sidney  Webb  says  of  the  Fabians,  that  from  the  begin- 
ning they  discountenanced  proposals  to  establish  utopian 
communities,  and  have  never  seen  reason  to  alter  their 
opinion.  Modern  socialism  does  not  preach  a  doctrine 
of  separation,  but  aims  to  change  the  whole  structure  of 
modern  society. 

A  socialistic  state,  under  the  auspices  of  the  Jesuits, 
was  established  in  Paraguay  in  the  seventeenth  century, 
and  lasted  for  a  hundred  years  or  more,  when  it  fell  to 
pieces,  owing  to  foreign  conquest.  This  failure  has  been 
adduced  as  an  argument  against  modern  socialism,  but  a 
little  reflection  will  show  that  it  has  no  bearing  on  the 
case  ;  and  we  can  only  wonder  that  this  state  survived  so 
long,  and  was  ultimately  overthrown  by  a  foreign  power. 
'The  kind  of  socialism  which  was  established  in  Paraguay 


ALLEGED   OBJECTIONS   TO   SOCIALISM.       185 

was  paternal  in  the  extreme;  it  lacked  the  advantages 
of  modern  production,  and  would  be  altogether  abhorrent 
to  the  modern  socialist.  Curiously  enough,  one  writer 
adduces  the  remark  of  a  traveller,  who  visited  Paraguay 
when  under  the  socialistic  regime,  that  he  saw  there 
many  discontented  faces,  as  a  serious  argument  against 
socialism.  One  may  walk  down  the  street  of  any  great 
American  or  English  city  and  discover  plenty  of  discon- 
tented faces ;  but  he  would  be  regarded  as  a  strange  man 
who,  on  this  account,  would  want  to  overthrow  the  exist- 
ing social  order. 

The  allegation  is  made  that  under  socialism  there  would 
be  no  provision  for  doing  the  disagreeable  work  which  is 
socially  necessary.  We  have  already  seen,  however,  that 
there  would  be  reason  to  anticipate  that  if  socialism 
could  be  made  to  work  at  all,  far  more  of  the  disa- 
greeable work  than  at  present  would  be  performed  by 
machinery.  Moreover,  much  of  the  work  which  is  now 
considered  unpleasant  is  so  esteemed  because  of  the  asso- 
ciations which  form  no  necessary  part  of  it.  Hoeing 
corn  is  not  unpleasant  work ;  on  the  contrary,  it  is  agree- 
able work  when  not  continued  too  many  hours  a  day,  say 
not  over  eight  or  ten,  and  when  hoeing  corn  gives  one 
agreeable  companionship.  When  an  educated  and  cul- 
tured man,  however,  finds  that  hoeing  corn  brings  him 
the  constant  and  exclusive  companionship  of  uneducated 
and  degraded  men  like,  for  example,  the  ignorant  negroes 
of  the  far  South,  it  becomes  most  intensely  disagreeable. 
It  is  the  associations  of  work  which,  so  far  as  nearly  all 
work  is  concerned,  render  it  agreeable  or  disagreeable, 
provided,  of  course,  one  is  strong  and  well  and  is  not 
overtaxed.  Should  there  remain  still  some  work  posi- 
tively disagreeable,  it  would  not  seem,  after  all,  unfair 


186  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

that  this  should  be  distributed  to  a  certain  extent  among 
all  the  members*  of  the  community,  rather  than  heaped 
upon  a  few  wretched  individuals,  who  thus  have  to  bear 
disproportionate  burdens.  It  does  not  seem  fair  that  one 
class  should  be  made  wretched  for  the  sake  of  the  com- 
munity as  a  whole,  unless  it  is  absolutely  necessary,  in 
order  that  the  work  of  civilization  may  go  forward.  It 
cannot  be  claimed,  however,  that  there  is  any  social 
necessity  for  this  concentration  of  disagreeable  work 
upon  a  few. 

All  this  reminds  one  of  the  argument  against  socialism 
so  current  in  Germany,  which  is  called  by  that  tremen- 
dous name,  "das  allgemeine  Stiefelputzenmiissen"  This 
means  simply  that  every  one  must  black  his  own  shoes. 
Will  it,  after  all,  interfere  with  the  highest  development 
of  culture  if  each  one  should  black  his  own  shoes  ?  The 
scholar  in  Germany  rarely,  if  ever,  performs  this  service 
for  himself ;  but  in  America  he  ordinarily  does  it,  and  it 
would  probably  be  hard  to  find  an  American  scholar  who 
would  say  that  he  found  the  performance  of  this  task  a 
serious  obstacle  in  the  way  of  the  fullest  unfolding  of 
all  his  powers.  We  are  reminded  of  the  question  which 
Abraham  Lincoln  put  to  the  Englishman  who  told  him 
that  in  England  no.  gentleman  blacked  his  own  boots. 
"  Whose  boots  does  he  black  then  ?  "  * 

Another  current  objection  to  socialism  is  that  it  will 
not  know  how  to  deal  with  the  idle.  We  have  already 
seen,  however,  that  socialism  alone  proposes  the  complete 
abolition  of  the  idle  classes.  So  far  as  the  idle  poor  are 
concerned,  we  do  not  hesitate  in  present  society  to  send 
them  to  the  penitentiary,  or,  in  the  South,  to  put  them 

1  For  some  sensible  remarks  on  this  subject  see  "  Die  soziale  Frage 
eine  sittliche  Frage,"  by  Prof.  Theobald  Ziegler,  p.  177. 


ALLEGED   OBJECTIONS   TO  SOCIALISM.        187 

in  the  chain  gang  when  they  become  paupers  and  tramps. 
We  do  not  hesitate  to  apply  whatever  physical  force  may 
be  required  to  make  a  man  work  now,  if  he  lacks  the 
means  of  subsistence,  and  it  cannot  be  necessary  to 
apply  greater  compulsion  under  socialism.  Socialists, 
however,  hope  that  the  desire  of  men  to  lead  idle  lives 
will  disappear,  or  nearly  so.  The  one  who  looks  at  this 
question  with  cold  impartiality  will  hardly  be  inclined 
to  share  the  enthusiastic  hopes  of  the  majority  of  social- 
ists in  this  respect ;  but,  at  the  same  time,  it  is  instructive 
to  learn  that  in  the  communistic  settlements  idleness  has 
been  one  of  the  least  difficult  factors  with  which  their 
members  have  had  to  contend. 

These  illustrations  of  fallacious  arguments  against 
socialism  serve  to  throw  light,  it  is  hoped,  upon  the  true 
nature  of  the  problem  with  which  we  are  confronted, 
and  to  clear  the  ground  for  those  serious  objections  to 
socialism  which  seem  to  very  many  to  be  decisive  against 
its  proposals. 


188  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL   REFORM. 


CHAPTER  III. 

SOCIALISM  TOO  OPTIMISTIC  WITH  RESPECT  TO  THE 

FUTURE,  AND  TOO  PESSIMISTIC  WITH 

RESPECT  TO  THE  PRESENT. 

BEFORE  we  consider  special  objections  to  socialism,  we 
will  direct  our  attention  to  those  of  the  most  general 
character.  First  of  all,  certain  weaknesses  in  socialism 
as  ordinarily  presented  will  be  noticed,  which  objections 
do  not,  of  necessity,  adhere  to  socialism  in  itself. 

If  the  question  is  asked,  what  is  necessary  to  establish 
socialism,  the  answer  cannot  be  difficult.  It  must  be 
shown  that  socialism,  while  having  its  difficulties  and  its 
objectionable  features,  is,  on  the  whole,  preferable  to  the 
existing  social  order,  both  with  respect  to  its  character- 
istics when  once  introduced,  and  with  respect  to  its 
promises  for  the  future.  It  is  conceivable,  for  example, 
that  although  socialism  may  be  better  than  the  present 
order  when  first  introduced,  it  may  not  have  in  it  the 
same  potentiality  of  further  improvement.  This  brings 
us  to  the  first  valid  objection  which  may  be  urged  against 
socialism,  in  its  ordinary  presentation  at  least.  It  is 
both  too  optimistic  and  too  pessimistic.  It  is  too  opti- 
mistic with  respect  to  the  future,  holding  that  conditions 
will  be  introduced  which,  on  sober  examination,  seem 
incompatible  with  the  existence  of  human  beings  upon 
an  earth  like  ours.  On  the  other  hand,  socialism  is  too 
pessimistic,  as  ordinarily  presented,  with  respect  to  our 
present  social  order.  The  evils  of  our  present  system  are 


SOCIALISM    TOO   OPTIMISTIC.  189 

vast  enough,  and  every  effort  to  remove  them,  or  to  in- 
crease the  good  in  the  world,  deserves  cordial  approbation. 
But  it  may  not  by  any  means  be  affirmed  that  the  present 
order  is  without  its  bright  side.  If  there  is  a  most 
wretched  class,  the  submerged  tenth,  there  is  also  a  very 
large  class  whose  needs  are  fairly  well  satisfied,  and  along 
many  lines  there  has  been  decided  improvement,  which  is 
still  in  progress. 

Socialism  is  too  optimistic  with  respect  to  the  pos- 
sibilities of  wealth  creation  under  socialism.  Socialists 
describe  a  condition  of  things  in  which  everyone  shall 
enjoy  all  those  comforts  and  conveniences  which  now 
fall  to  the  lot  alone  of  those  whom  we  regard  as  wealthy. 
The  possibility  of  living  in  a  condition  of  what  would 
now  be  called  luxury  is  held  out  to  the  masses  as  an  in- 
ducement to  adopt  socialism.  The  necessary  limits  to 
the  production  of  wealth  found  in  external  nature  and 
in  the  possibilities  of  social  organization  are  overlooked. 
There  is  no  difficulty,  to  be  sure,  in  regard  to  the  pro- 
duction of  cotton  or  wheat.  There  is  reason  to  suppose 
that  it  is  possible  to  supply  all  human  beings  with  all 
that  they  can  need  of  certain  staple  articles,  although  it 
becomes  apparent  that  this  means  an  immense  extension 
of  production,  when  one  reflects  upon  the  millions  of 
human  beings  whose  elementary  wants  are  unsatisfied. 
There  are  articles  of  ordinary  consumption  which  could 
not,  without  great  difficulty,  be  so  increased  that  all 
human  beings,  even  in  what  are  now  the  civilized  parts  of 
the  world,  could  enjoy  as  much  as  they  would  like,  or, 
let  us  say,  equal  the  consumption  of  the  wealthy  at  the 
present  time.  Meat  might  be  mentioned  as  one  of  these 
articles.  The  production  of  meat  requires  an  extensive 
use  of  natural  resources,  and  with  all  the  improvements 


190  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

in  the  means  of  communication,  its  retail  price  seems  to 
rise  rather  than  fall.  Should  the  consumption  of  meat  be 
very  greatly  increased  it  would  be  attended  with  more 
than  proportionate  increase  in  the  cost,  because,  either 
it  would  be  necessary  to  use  more  expensive  land  for 
raising  cattle,  or  more  remote  regions  would  have  to  be 
exploited. 

The  proportion  of  one's  income  used  in  the  purchase 
of  those  staple  articles  of  production  which  can  be  in- 
creased very  greatly  decreases  as  one's  income  increases, 
and  it  is  only  a  small  proportion  of  the  income  of  the 
wealthy  which  is  thus  employed  at  the  present  time.  If 
one  examines  into  the  essential  conditions  of  the  life 
of  a  family  which  is  in  marked  degree  what  we  call 
comfortable,  not  to  say  luxurious,  it  will  be  found  that 
it  implies  the  continuous  exertions  of  several  human 
beings,  especially  in  the  way  of  personal  services.  Per- 
sonal services  are  necessarily  limited  in  amount,  and 
invention  cannot  increase  this  amount,  although  it  may, 
to  some  extent,  lessen  the  need  of  these  services.  Man- 
ifestly, not  everyone  could  live  in  a  condition  which 
would  imply  the  personal  services  of  some  one  else.  This 
means  a  great  deal,  and  to  see  how  much  it  means,  it  is 
only  necessary  for  those  who  are  familiar  with  the  vari- 
ous parts  of  the  United  States  to  reflect  upon  the  condi- 
tions of  life  in  portions  of  the  country  where  personal 
services  are  scarce  and  high  in  price.  A  person  of  mod- 
erate means  coming  to  the  North,  or  to  the  far  West, 
from  the  South,  will  say  life  is  hard.  It  is  one  of  the 
most  common  expressions  used  by  housewives  under 
such  circumstances.  When  we  examine  into  the  condi- 
tions, what  do  we  find  it  is  that  makes  life  hard  for 
those  who  complain,  except  the  scarcity  of  personal  ser- 


SOCIALISM  TOO   OPTIMISTIC.  191 

vices  and  the  difficulty  of  securing  them  ?  Manifestly, 
under  socialism,  servants  would  be  relatively  few,  or 
would  practically  disappear.  This  may  have  its  bright 
side,  but  unquestionably  it  has  also  its  dark  side.  It  is 
hoped  that  household  service  may  be  better  organized, 
and  things  now  produced  within  the  home,  be  produced 
outside  the  home.  There  is  a  tendency,  even  now,  to 
carry  production  outside  the  home  into  the  factory  ;  but 
this  by  no  means  obviates  all  the  difficulties  and  ob- 
jections which  would  attend  such  a  change.  Frugal 
comfort  for  all,  with  large  public  expenditures,  and  op- 
portunities for  common  enjoyment  in  museums,  art 
galleries,  parks,  etc.,  would  seem  to  be  the  most  for 
which  we  could  hope,  even  if  the  plans  of  the  socialists 
were  capable  of  being  reduced  to  practice. 

It  is  perhaps  true  that  adherents  of  the  existing  order 
are,  in  a  measure,  responsible  for  illusions  in  regard  to 
the  possibilities  of  wealth  creation.  We  hear  it  claimed 
that  a  single  individual  has  added  to  the  wealth  of  the 
country,  by  his  own  exertions,  one  hundred  millions  of 
dollars.  If  it  were  possible  for  any  human  being  to  add 
so  much  to  the  wealth  of  the  country,  or  to  that  of  the 
world  at  large,  the  wildest  hopes  of  the  socialists  with 
respect  to  the  future  might  not  be  ill-founded.  When 
we  examine,  however,  into  the  processes  by  which  vast 
wealth  is  acquired,  we  find  that  we  cannot  admit  the 
claim  that  it  is  possible  for  any  human  being  to  add  one 
hundred  millions  to  the  store  of  existing  wealth.  When 
such  a  fortune  has  been  acquired,  it  means  simply  that 
some  one  has  been  enabled  to  appropriate  this  large 
amount  of  wealth.  He  has  established  claims  which 
have  that  value  upon  present  and  future  production. 
His  methods  may  have  been  legitimate  and  proper,  but 


192  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

that  does  not  alter  the  fact  that  the  fortune  is  an  un- 
earned one,  so  far  as  concerns  the  individual  who  enjoys 
it.  The  process  of  railway  consolidation  is  responsible 
for  vast  fortunes;  but  this  railway  consolidation  was 
something  which  lay  in  the  nature  of  the  enterprises 
themselves,  and  certain  individuals  were  in  a  position  to 
reap  the  advantages  of  the  natural  evolution  of  railways. 
The  individuals  who  enjoy  these  fortunes  could  not  have 
prevented  the  consolidation  if  they  had  desired  to  do  so. 
No  one  need  blame  them  nor  find  fault  with  them,  as  long 
as  they  employed  proper  methods.  On  the  contrary,  the 
blame  must  then  rest  upon  society,  because  society  made 
it  possible  for  individuals  to  appropriate  gains  which 
should  have  gone  to  society  as  a  whole. 

Socialists  are  too  optimistic  with  respect  to  the  possi- 
bilities of  change  in  the  near  future,  or  rather  let  us  say 
in  a  future  so  near  that  we  need  to  concern  ourselves 
with  it.  We  here  encounter  difficulties  in  the  way  of 
socialism  which  are  largely  psychological  in  nature. 
Socialism  implies  a  new  economic  world,  with  new 
habits  of  thought,  and  new  motives.  Whereas  men 
have  been  accustomed  to  view  the  everyday  work  of  life 
from  one  standpoint,  they  must  learn  naturally  and  spon- 
taneously to  look  upon  it  from  a  different  standpoint,  if 
socialism  is  to  work  well.  This  is  not  merely  a  question 
of  improvement  in  human  nature,  but  a  question  of  those 
psychological  habits  which  would  enable  men,  under  radi- 
cally different  social  institutions,  to  appreciate  adequately 
the  line  of  conduct  calculated  to  promote  their  own 
interests. 

Men  are  deceived  by  the  rapidity  with  which  political 
changes  have  been  effected,  and  with  which  changes  in 
the  modes  of  production  have  been  brought  about.  Polit- 


SOCIALISM  TOO  OPTIMISTIC.  198 

ical  forms  do  not  touch  in  marked  degree  the  every- 
day life  of  men.  Constitutions  come  and  go,  but  the 
ordinary  farmer  or  artisan  scarcely  appreciates  the  dif- 
ference. Yet  even  political  changes  often  require  more 
time  than  we  are  apt  to  think.  Has  it  not  taken  a  hun- 
dred years  to  establish  a  republican  form  of  government 
iu  France  upon  a  firm  basis, — if  we  grant  that  even 
now  it  has  become  permanent  in  France  ? 

Men  have  to  learn  to  feel  themselves  republicans.  Re- 
publican government  has  to  become  a  part  of  their  habit- 
ual consciousness  in  order  to  make  it  secure.  The  changes 
in  the  modes  of  production  have  been  far  more  far-reach- 
ing, but  they  have  largely  been  forced  upon  men  by  con- 
ditions beyond  individual  control,  and  even  then  have 
not  changed,  except  slowly  and  gradually,  the  most  fun- 
damental institutions.  They  have  been  productive  of  no 
change  which  would  correspond  to  the  complete  substitu- 
tion of  public  industry  for  private  industry. 

Some  one  might  hold  that,  slowly  and  gradually,  as  the 
result  of  evolution,  partly  spontaneous  and  partly  socially 
controlled,1  we  should,  at  the  expiration  of  a  long  period, 
say  three  hundred  years,  come  to  a  socialistic  state. 
Such  a  person,  however,  would  be  merely  a  speculative 
socialist,  and  not  a  practical  one.  Ordinarily  speaking, 
we  can  call  only  those  socialists  who  hold  that  socialism 
is  near  enough  so  that  we  ought  to  shape  our  action  prac- 
tically with  reference  to  it.  So  far  as  the  remote  future 
is  concerned,  the  wise  man  will  be  very  slow  to  attempt 
any  thing  like  prediction.  We  can  see  forces  working  in 
a  certain  direction  at  the  present  time,  but  we  know  that 

1  The  exact  technical  term  would  be  socio-teleological,  that  is 
change  self-consciously  guided  by  society  with  reference  to  desired 
ends. 


194  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

society,  in  its  development,  does  not  move  in  a  straight 
line.  It  seems  at  one  time  to  move  in  one  direction,  and 
latter  in  an  almost  opposite  direction ;  and  so  it  is  fre- 
quently said  that  social  progress  is  more  like  a  spiral 
than  a  straight  line. 

Socialism  is  too  pessimistic  with  respect  to  the  present, 
because  it  fails  to  appreciate  adequately  the  secondary 
distribution  of  property  brought  about  by  what  may  be 
technically  called  the  caritative  principle  in  distribution. 
The  caritative  principle  is  the  principle  of  fraternity,  or 
benevolence.  The  distribution  of  property  effected  by 
this  principle  of  benevolence  is  chiefly  secondary  distri- 
bution. After  men  have  acquired  property  through  the 
primary  processes  of  production  and  distribution,  they 
frequently  distribute  it  according  to  quite  different  meth- 
ods. A  man  who  enjoys  an  income  of  one  hundred  thou- 
sand dollars  a  year  may  use  a  large  portion  of  this  income 
to  ameliorate  the  inequalities  and  injustices  which  result 
from  the  primary  economic  processes.  He  may,  for  ex- 
ample, educate  a  poor  but  promising  young  person,  and 
give  him  6very  opportunity  to  develop  all  his  talents ; 
and  with  another  part  of  his  surplus  income  he  may 
relieve  the  necessities  of  the  aged  and  infirm. 

It  is  easily  possible  to  exaggerate  what  may  be  effected 
by  the  caritative  principle  in  society,  and  the  general 
tendency  is  to  rely  too  much  upon  it.  At  the  same  time, 
it  is  a  grievous  error  to  overlook  it  altogether,  or  to  regard 
it,  as  the  socialists  usually  do,  as  entirely  insignificant. 

We  may  similarly  object  to  socialism,  that  socialists 
under-estimate  the  services  rendered  by  the  capitalist 
and  the  captain  of  industry  in  the  present  society.  Our 
industrial  leaders  are  those  who  give  us  our  present  in- 
dustrial organization,  and  their  services  are  necessarily 


SOCIALISM  TOO  OPTIMISTIC.  195 

arduous,  requiring  the  exercise  of  unusual  powers.  We 
are  not  now  speaking  about  the  drones  who  are  living 
upon  the  past  toil  of  themselves  or  their  ancestors,  but 
about  those  who  are  actually  employed  in  industrial  lead- 
ership. Such  men  frequently  sacrifice  themselves,  and 
what  is  best  in  life,  in  their  efforts  to  guide  industrial 
society.  They  put  at  stake  their  wealth,  and  they  plan 
ceaselessly  to  utilize  the  forces  of  production  to  the  best 
advantage.  Frequently  they  achieve  remarkable  success, 
resulting  in  a  multiplication  and  cheapening  of  commod- 
ities. Their  efforts  often  result  in  a  better  utilization  of 
natural  forces,  and  open  up  new  sources  of  wealth.  We 
must,  on  the  one  hand,  not  underrate,  as  the  socialists  are 
so  much  inclined  to  do,  the  inherent  difficulties  in  indus- 
trial management ;  and  on  the  other,  we  make  a  mistake 
if  we  fail  to  remember  the  hesitation  and  timidity  which 
is  apt  to  attend  collective  action.  Capitalists  will  fre- 
quently risk  millions  of  dollars  in  an  undertaking  which 
is  so  uncertain  that  one  would  hesitate  to  recommend  it 
to  the  representatives  of  the  collectivity,  whether  these 
representatives  be  the  legislators  of  the  present  state,  or 
the  administrators,  so-called,  of  the  socialistic  state.  The 
author  is  not  disposed  to  dwell  too  much  on  this  weakness 
in  socialism.  It  is  quite  possible  for  society  to  secure 
better  leaders  than  those  now  elected  to  serve  it,  and 
changed  circumstances  might  develop  a  sufficiently  dar- 
ing public  spirit.1  But  those  who  advocate  socialism 
should  do  so  fully  conscious  of  the  services  which  capi- 
talists render  in  their  personal  efforts,  and  in  the  risks 
which  they  take,  and  also  be  well  aware  of  the  difficulties 
accompanying  general  social  action. 

1  Public  authority  in  New  Zealand  has  been  more  adventurous 
than  private  persons  in  opening  up  the  resources  of  the  country  by  the 
extension  of  railway  lines,  and  by  other  undertakings. 


196  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL   REFORM. 

Socialists  are  too  pessimistic  with  respect  to  the  pres- 
ent society,  because  they  underestimate  the  possibilities 
of  developing  the  social  side  of  private  property.  Pri- 
vate property  has  two  sides,  the  individual  and  the 
social ;  but  the  social  side  is  dominant.  Private  prop- . 
erty  is,  according  to  its  necessary  idea,  maintained  for 
social  purposes.  It  exists  for  the  sake  of  society,  and 
this  suggests  great  possibilities  of  development,  which  are 
still  compatible  with  the  existing  industrial  order.  We 
may  keep  private  property  in  the  instruments  of  produc- 
tion in  the  main,  and  yet  introduce  seriftus  modifications  in 
the  institution  itself,  to  enable  it  better  to  subserve  social 
purposes.  At  the  same  time,  we  can  extend  along  certain 
lines  public  property,  even  while  allowing  private  prop- 
erty to  remain  dominant.  An  adherent  of  the  existing 
social  order  may  thus  take  the  position  that  things  have 
become  private  property  which,  according  to  their  nature, 
should  be  public  property,  and  that  private  property  in 
its  own  sphere  includes  rights  which  are  no  necessary 
part  of  it.  It  was  the  possibility  of  developing  the  social 
side  of  private  property  which  led  John  Stuart  Mill,  in 
one  part  of  his  "Political  Economy,"  to  declare  against 
socialism;  for  he  maintained  that  we  must  first  know 
what  improvements  are  compatible  with  private  property, 
before  we  decide  to  abandon  the  institution  itself.  He 
declared  frankly,  that  had  he  to  make  his  choice  between 
society  as  it  exists  to-day  and  communism,  then  all  the 
difficulties  of  communism,  great  and  small,  would  be  but 
as  dust  in  the  balance.  But  he  maintained  that  this 
dilemma  was  not  forced  upon  us,  because  we  had  nevel 
yet  given  private  property  a  fair  trial. 


DISSATISFACTION   UNDER  SOCIALISM.      197 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE  DANGER  OP  THE   DOMINATION  OP  A  SINGLE  IN- 
DUSTRIAL PRINCIPLE,  AND  OP  THE  INEVITABLE 
CONCENTRATION  OF  DISSATISFACTION 
UNDER  SOCIALISM. 

WE  cannot  expect  the  best  results  in  civilization,  un- 
less within  it  many  different  principles  operate.  The 
claim  has  been  made,  indeed,  that  the  domination  of  a 
single  social  principle,  as  for  example  the  military  prin- 
ciple, has  caused  the  downfall  of  older  civilizations,  and 
it  has  been  shown  by  a  thoughtful  observer  of  American 
life,  whose  utterances  are  always  fruitful  in  suggestion, 
that  mercantilism  has  been  the  bane  of  American  life 
heretofore.1  Mercantilism,  as  thus  used,  means  the 
principle  of  private  business.  There  can  be  no  doubt 
whatever,  that  the  domination  of  this  principle  has 
caused  vast  harm  to  the  United  States,  and  that  it  is 
even  a  source  of  grave  danger  to  our  institutions.  The 
custom  has  been  growing  of  looking  at  men  and  meas- 
ures from  the  commercial  standpoint.  Too  often  every- 
thing, including  character  itself,  has  been  regarded  as 
something  which  can  be  estimated  in  dollars  and  cents, 
and  the  idea  that  anyone  can  be  actuated  by  any  other 
than  mercantile  considerations  has  been  greeted  by  a 
large  class  with  scepticism  and  even  mockery.  The 
principle  of  private  business  has  invaded  government,  and 

i  Ex-President  Andrew  D.  White,  in  the  address  entitled  "  The 
Message  of  the  Niuteenth  Century  to  the  Twentieth." 


198  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

office  itself  has  been  considered  not  as  a  trust  but  as  an 
article  of  merchandise.  Political  contests  have  been  re- 
duced to  a  struggle  for  "boodle;"  and  the  suggestion 
that  something  higher  should  dominate  practical  politics 
lias  been  scornfully  rejected  as  what  is  called  "  Sunday- 
school  politics,"  while  the  saying  that  every  man  has 
his  price  finds  believers  on  every  hand. 

Socialism,  however,  proposes  to  go  to  an  opposite  ex- 
treme, instead  of  seeking  the  golden  mean.  Socialists 
want  to  abolish  the  principle  of  private  business,  to 
substitute  for  it  the  collective  industrial  principle,  and 
to  make  that  dominate  our  life  to  a  greater  extent  than 
it  is  now  controlled  by  mercantilism.  While  the  evils 
might  well  be  expected  to  be  different  from  those  we 
now  experience,  it  is  to  be  feared  that  they  would  by 
no  means  be  less.  The  principle  of  private  business  has 
its  own  place,  it  would  seem,  in  civilization.  There  are 
many  persons  well  fitted  to  render  service  to  their 
country  in  private  business  because  they  love  bold  and 
daring  ventures,  and  individual  initiative  is  indispens- 
able to  the  unfolding  of  their  powers.  These  same  men 
are  frequently  unfitted,  by  their  very  excellence  in  the 
field  of  private  business,  for  public  life,  which  oper- 
ates quite  differently,  requiring  a  careful  elaboration  of 
plans  and  a  submission  of  these  plans  to  boards  or  coun- 
cils, which  hold  men  accountable  for  all  that  is  done, 
as  well  as  all  that  is  left  undone. 

Public  life,  on  the  other  hand,  has  its  charms  for  many, 
and  requires  special  preparation  if  it  is  to  yield  its 
largest  results.  Many  men  are  better  qualified  for  pub- 
lic life  than  for  private  life,  as  we  see  from  the  fact 
that  some  have  rendered  distinguished  service  to  their 
country  in  office,  who  have  not  succeeded  in  private  in- 


DISSATISFACTION   UNDER  SOCIALISM. 

dustry.  Mercantilism  in  the  United  States  has  not 
made  adequate  room  and  provision  for  those  who  would 
gladly  give  themselves  the  best  possible  preparation  for 
usefulness  in  public  office,  and  has  thus  deprived  the 
country  of  great  benefits  which  might  have  been  re- 
ceived. But  socialism,  while  providing  amply  for  the 
employment  of  those  adapted  to  public  life,  would  not 
make  provision  for  the  large  and  numerous  class  best 
fitted  for  private  industry. 

Far  more  serious  than  the  objections  to  socialism 
which  have  already  been  mentioned  is  the  concentration 
of  dissatisfaction  which  would  be  inevitable  under  so- 
cialism. Socialism  means  the  unification  of  production. 
But  even  if  socialism  worked  well,  there  would  still 
be  a  vast  amount  of  dissatisfaction,  more  or  less  well- 
founded,  with  the  commodities  and  services  furnished  to 
the  masses  of  the  community.  At  the  present  time  the 
dissatisfaction  with  material  conditions  is  immense,  but 
it  is  diffused  among  a  multitude  of  persons,  and  thus  the 
burden  is  borne.  We  are  dissatisfied  with  the  milkman 
because  he  uses  the  pump  too  freely,  but  soon  our  dis- 
satisfaction is  diverted  into  another  channel  by  annoy- 
ances in  the  kitchen.  The  unsatisfactory  service  of  the 
cook,  however,  is  presently  placed  in  the  shade  by  ex- 
orbitant express  charges,  and  these  again  are  forgotten 
in  the  indignation  which  is  experienced  when  we  receive 
a  gas-bill  too  high  by  one  hundred  per  cent.  Thus  it 
goes  throughout  life ;  and  one  reason  why  we  bear  with 
such  extraordinary  patience  poor  services  and  other 
abuses  in  the  field  of  private  industry,  is  because  our 
dissatisfaction  is  diffused  among  so  many,  and  no  one 
person  or  group  of  persons  has  to  bear  the  entire  load  of 
our  indignation.  How  different  it  would  be  under  social- 


200  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

ism  becomes  apparent  when  we  reflect  upon  the  present 
popular  attitude  with  respect  to  government.  Not  only 
do  we  not  appreciate  the  excellences  of  government  ser- 
vices as  we  would  if  they  were  rendered  by  private  cor- 
porations, but  we  have  only  a  fractional  part  of  the 
patience  with  the  weaknesses  and  mistakes  of  govern- 
ment which  we  have  when  we  must  endure  the  result  of 
similar  weaknesses  and  mistakes  of  private  individuals 
or  private  corporations.  A  comparison  of  the  services 
rendered  by  the  post-office  and  the  express  companies  is 
quite  to  the  point.  The  post-office  renders  better  service 
on  the  whole  for  far  less  money,  and  it  takes  much  more 
trouble  to  accommodate  the  general  public.  The  efforts 
and  the  success  of  the  post-office  in  tracing  addresses 
and  in  delivering  letters  and  parcels  to  the  one  to  whom 
they  are  sent  are  little  short  of  marvellous.  The  author, 
when  living  in  Baltimore,  has  frequently  received  mail 
packages  sent  by  mistake  to  Boston,  and  when  packages 
and  letters  have  been  sent  to  Baltimore  it  seemed  to 
make  no  difference  whatever  how  they  were  addressed, 
as  they  always  reached  him  safely  and  quickly.  Else- 
where he  has  had  similar  experience.  Everyone  who 
has  had  experience  with  the  express  companies  knows 
that  they  make  little  effort  to  find  one,  and  if  they  do 
not  at  once  discover  the  address  of  the  person  to  whom 
a  package  is  sent,  they  frequently  drop  a  postal  card  into 
the  post-office  with  the  same  address  as  that  given  on 
the  package,  and  the  post-office  has  no  difficulty  in  find- 
ing the  person  not  discovered  by  the  express  company. 
The  express  companies  have  regular  printed  forms  on 
postal  cards  for  informing  persons  that  it  has  not  been 
possible  to  find  them,  and  then  these  postal  cards  are 
addressed  as  the  express  parcels  have  been.  It  may  not 


DISSATISFACTION   UNDER   SOCIALISM.        201 

be  out  of  place  to  give  one  illustration.  Some  time  since 
the  author  had  occasion  to  send  a  parcel  from  Madison 
to  Washington,  but  the  parcel  was  misdirected  to  a 
wrong  number  of  the  street.  The  express  company  sent 
a  postal  stating  that  there  was  no  such  number  and  the 
parcel  could  not  be  delivered.  The  person  to  whom  the 
parcel  had  been  sent  was  notified  by  a  postal  card  mis- 
directed just  as  the  parcel  had  been,  that  the  parcel  was 
awaiting  him  at  the  express  office,  and  the  postal  was 
delivered  promptly.  So  far  as  speed  is  concerned,  the 
author  may  say  that  for  some  five  years  he  had  occasion 
frequently  to  use  both  the  post-office  and  the  express 
companies,  and  he  never  knew  an  instance  in  which  the 
post-office  parcel  did  not  reach  its  destination  sooner 
than  the  express  parcel,  when  both  were  sent  to  the  same 
place  at  the  same  time.1  Others  who  have  tried  experi- 
ments of  this  kind,  or  who  will  reflect  upon  their  expe- 
riences, will  be  able  to  substantiate  what  is  here  said,  and 
yet  the  facts  are  far  from  being  generally  appreciated. 
It  is  supposed  that  a  safety  and  celerity  greater  than 
the  facts  warrant  are  furnished  by  the  express  com- 
pany, and  the  responsibility  for  loss,  which  it  is  generally 
believed  the  express  companies  bear,  is  frequently  ren- 
dered illusory  by  devices  too  numerous  to  be  mentioned. 
Many  services  rendered  by  private  corporations  are 
such  in  quality  that  they  would  not  be  tolerated  were 
they  public  services.  Let  the  reader,  when  making  a 
journey  on  a  railway,  imagine  it  operated  by  the  govern- 

1  The  manuscript  of  the  present  work  serves  as  a  good  illustration. 
At  the  request  of  the  publishers  it  was  sent  by  express  to  Boston, 
Mass.  It  was  given  to  the  express  agent  in  Madison,  Wis.,  March  15, 
and  was  delivered  in  Boston  five  days  later ;  namely,  March  20.  Had 
it  been  sent  by  mail  at  the  same  time,  it  would  have  been  delivered 
March  17. 


202  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

ment,  and  ask  himself  what  objections  would  be  made 
to  the  service,  provided  its  quality  should  not  change  at 
all.  When  the  author  made  a  trip  from  Baltimore,  Md., 
to  Dunkirk,  N.Y.,  via  Rochester  and  Buffalo,  some  time 
since,  it  occurred  to  him  that  it  would  not  be  an  altogether 
bad  idea,  imitating  Mr.  Bellamy,  to  dream  that  our  rail- 
ways had  passed  under  government  ownership,  and  were 
controlled  by  the  government;  and  then  to  describe  the 
trip  as  it  actually  occurred,  pointing  out  the  annoyances 
and  inconveniences  suffered,  and  to  show  how  such  an- 
noyances and  inconveniences  would  be  impossible  with  a 
system  of  free  private  industry,  with  its  natural  desire  to 
please.  The  line  of  argument  used  by  so-called  ortho- 
dox political  economists  of  the  present  time  with  regard 
to  private  enterprise  could  be  followed.  Attention  would 
first  be  called  to  the  fact  that  the  upper  berth  in  the 
sleeping-car  was  lowered,  although  it  was  unoccupied; 
then  to  the  fact  that  the  oil  lamps  smoked  and  gave  a 
feeble  light,  although  railways  elsewhere  had  adopted 
electric  lighting  or  gas,  even  in  the  second-class  passen- 
ger coaches ;  and  further,  to  the  fact,  that  such  a  little 
convenience  as  a  hood  to  cover  the  lamps,  and  to  prevent 
their  shining  into  the  eyes  of  some  of  the  occupants  of 
the  upper  berths,  had  not  been  adopted.  It  could  be 
shown  conclusively  that  all  these  abuses  could  only  exist 
under  a  system  of  government  ownership.  Attention 
would  then  be  called  to  the  fact  that  passengers  were 
obliged  to  wait  three-quarters  of  an  hour  in  Rochester, 
and  five  or  six  hours  in  Buffalo,  where  a  change  was  made 
from  the  New  York  Central  to  the  Lake  Shore  Railway, 
the  Lake  Shore  train  leaving  according  to  schedule  time, 
five  minutes  before  the  New  York  Central  train  arrived. 
It  could  be  proved  beyond  all  doubt  that  under  a  private 


DISSATISFACTION   UNDER   SOCIALISM.        203 

system  such  gross  neglect  of  the  convenience  of  the 
travelling  public  could  not  possibly  take  place.  After 
a  description  of  the  trip,  as  a  dream  of  experiences  under 
government  ownership,  the  dreamer  would  wake  up  and 
find  that  it  had  all  actually  taken  place  under  private 
ownership.  Then  the  query  would  be,  "How  could  it 
happen  ?  " 

Had  the  classical  economist  visited  Baltimore  a  few 
years  ago,  under  the  impression  that  the  street-car  lines 
were  owned  and  operated  by  the  city,  it  is  easy  to 
imagine  what  he  would  have  said.  The  accommoda- 
tions for  the  public,  at  certain  times  of  the  day,  were 
entirely  inadequate,  and  travel  was  slow,  almost  beyond 
comparison.  Our  economist,  under  the  hypothesis  men- 
tioned, would  have  repeated  for  us  the  old  phrase  :  "  The 
government  stroke  is  slow,"  and  the  people  would  have 
been  invited  to  try  active,  alert  private  enterprise.  This 
same  person  visiting  the  street  in  Baltimore  called  the 
York  Road,  would  have  found  it  as  disgusting  a  city 
street,  perhaps,  as  could  be  found  in  any  city  which 
could  with  reason  boast  of  a  considerable  degree  of 
wealth  and  culture.  Looking  at  the  muddy,  ill-kept 
street,  poorly  paved,  full  of  depressions  filled  with  water, 
and  turning  his  eyes  to  the  street-car  tracks,  elevated 
several  inches  above  the  surface,  —  an  unsightly  incon- 
venience,—  and  observing  the  general  absence  of  side- 
walks, and  the  poor  quality  of  the  walks  where  they  did 
exist,  he  would  have  said :  "  This  is  conclusive  against 
municipal  enterprise."  Careful  inquiry  would  have  re- 
vealed the  fact,  however,  that  all  which  he  beheld  «vas, 
like  the  street-car  lines,  private  enterprise ;  for  the  York 
Road  was  a  toll-road,  the  unsightly  and  inconvenient 
car  tracks  were  maintained  by  a  private  corporation, 


204  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

and  the  sidewalks,  where  they  existed,  were  purely  in- 
dividual enterprises. 

These  illustrations  might  be  continued  indefinitely. 
It  has  been  necessary  to  give  such  illustrations  at  some 
length,  because  they  are  of  great  importance  in  illustrat- 
ing the  fact  that  any  careful  observer  will  notice  that  we 
are  more  impatient  with  government  enterprise  than  with 
private  industry.  We  are  dealing  with  psychological 
phenomena.  If  we  had  collective  management  of  indus- 
try, the  collectivity,  or  those  administering  it,  would  be 
held  responsible  for  whatever  did  not  suit  us ;  and  the 
psychological  result  of  this  concentration  of  dissatisfac- 
tion would  be  a  revolutionary  state  of  mind. 

The  outcome  of  socialism,  then,  it  is  to  be  apprehended, 
would  be  such  an  amount  of  dissatisfaction  that  one  of 
two  things  would  happen  :  either  socialism  would  result 
in  a  series  of  revolutions,  reducing  countries  like  Eng- 
land and  the  United  States  to  the  condition  of  the  South 
American  republics,  and  rendering  progress  impossible ; 
or  the  dissatisfaction  would  cause  a  complete  overthrow 
of  socialism,  and  a  return  to  the  discredited  social  order. 

It  may  be  said,  in  reply,  that  the  higher  standard 
which  would  be  set  for  government  enterprises  argues  a 
strength  in  socialism.  This  is  only  true  providing  that 
we  have  a  more  intelligent  and  philosophical  population 
than  any  population  which  can  anywhere  be  found  at 
present.  It  is,  however,  an  argument  for  the  extension 
of  government  industry  along  certain  well  defined  lines, 
as  fast  as  public  opinion  can  be  educated  in  such  manner 
as  tp  appreciate  and  to  support  public  enterprise. 

Closely  Connected  with  the  weakness  of  socialism, 
which  has  just  been  discussed,  is  the  objection  that  the 
selfishness  of  designing  and  unscrupulous  men  interposes 


DISSATISFACTION   UNDER  SOCIALISM.       205 

obstacles  in  the  way  of  progress  in  the  direction  of  social- 
ism. Such  men,  even  now,  utilize  unwarranted  dissatis- 
faction with  government  for  their  own  advantage.  They 
exaggerate  any  weaknesses  or  shortcomings  of  govern- 
ment, and  take  pains  to  fan  the  flames  of  discontent,  if 
thereby  they  can  get  into  their  possession  the  business 
which  has  heretofore  been  a  public  service.  The  gas- 
works of  Philadelphia  furnish  an  illustration.  From 
time  to  time  men  have  formed  combinations  for  the  pur- 
pose of  gaming  control  of  these  gas-works,  in  order  that 
they  might  reap  the  enormous  returns  which  they  would 
yield  to  private  parties  under  private  management. 
When  the  gas  in  Philadelphia  has  been  poor,  the  organs 
of  this  ring  have  talked  about  it,  and  have  told  the 
people  that  no  other  city  in  the  country  had  such 
poor  gas,  whereas  one  who  had  travelled  extensively  at 
all  could  see  that  this  was  an  entirely  false  statement. 
Every  defect  in  municipal  management  was  exaggerated, 
every  merit  was  minimized.1  Not  only  was  the  press  of 
the  city,  at  least  with  few  exceptions,  operated  in  behalf 
of  this  scheme,  but  the  municipal  council  was  at  one  time 
very  nearly  captured.  It  required  a  great  effort  on  the 
part  of  the  best  elements  in  the  city  to  save  to  the  city 
this  valuable  property.  Since  that  time,  it  is  hoped  that 
the  public  in  Philadelphia  has  been  so  enlightened,  that  a 
further  attempt  of  private  parties  to  secure  the  gas-works 
would  be  unsuccessful.  But  this  illustration  shows  how 
slow  and  difficult  progress  must  be  in  the  direction  of  the 
socialization  of  industry. 

1  It  is  even  claimed  that  those  who  wanted  to  purchase  the  gas- 
works used  their  influence  in  the  council  to  defeat  appropriations 
needed  for  the  improvement  and  extension  of  the  gas-plant,  thus 
doing  what  they  could  to  make  the  service  poor. 


206  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 


CHAPTER  V. 
SOCIALISM   A    MENACE   TO   LTBEBTY. 

THE  danger  to  liberty,  which  it  is  urged  socialism 
would  carry  with  it,  is  usually  mentioned  as  the  chief 
objection  to  the  proposals  of  the  socialists.  The  line  of 
argument  adopted  by  those  who  claim  that  socialism 
would  be  dangerous  to  liberty  is  a  familiar  one,  and  need 
not  detain  us  long.  We  may  say  that  at  present  there 
are  two  spheres  of  occupation,  the  public  and  the  pri- 
vate, and  that  each  offers  an  escape  from  the  other.  He 
who  feels  that  he  is  restrained  or  oppressed  in  the  public 
service  may  seek  relief  in  private  employment,  or  he  may 
endeavor  to  establish  a  business  of  his  own.  On  the 
other  hand,  those  who  are  oppressed  in  private  employ- 
ment often  find  a  refuge  and  a  larger  freedom  in  the 
public  service.  There  would,  under  socialism,  be  only 
one  considerable  sphere  of  employment,  and  there  is 
reason  to  fear  that  the  inability  to  escape  from  the  public 
sphere  would  compel  the  submission  to  onerous  and 
tyrannical  conditions,  imposed  by  the  administrative 
heads  of  the  business  in  which  one  might  be  engaged. 
But  even  this  is  not  all,  because  it  is  claimed  that  pri- 
vate employment,  on  account  of  the  multiplicity  of  em- 
ployers, affords  greater  protection  against  oppression 
than  does  public  service ;  consequently,  that  the  sphere 
of  occupation  offering  the  chief  guaranties  would  be  re- 
duced to  insignificant  dimensions.  We  are  admonished, 
furthermore,  that  parties  must  always  exist.  Differences 


SOCIALISM  A  MENACE   TO  LIBERTY.         207 

of  policy,  or  personal  quarrels,  giving  rise  to  political 
dissensions,  would  exist  under  socialism  as  well  as  in  a 
competitive  society.  Would  not  the  dominant  party 
punish  opponents  ?  Naturally,  it  would  be  impossible 
to  dismiss  one  from  the  public  service,  but  one  could  be 
oppressed  otherwise.  It  is  quite  possible  to  worry  and 
annoy  an  obnoxious  employee,  and  to  favor  one  whom 
it  is  desired  to  favor,  in  a  thousand  and  one  ways  which 
can  be  felt,  but  not  formulated  and  denned  in  such  man- 
ner that  they  can  be  made  the  subject  of  legal  proof  and 
formal  complaint. 

The  socialists,  however,  do  not  lack  for  a  rejoinder  to 
these  current  objections,  although  their  reply  may  not  be 
regarded  as  a  sufficient  answer.  We  must,  first  of  all, 
notice  that  socialists  have  a  somewhat  different  concep- 
tion of  liberty  from  that  which  usually  obtains.  They 
have  their  minds  fixed  upon  economic  liberty,  rather 
than  political  liberty.  They  desire  that  every  man  shall 
have  a  voice  in  the  control,  of  industry,  and  not  be  sub- 
jected to  rules  framed  by  others.  But  this  is  not  all. 
They  perceive  that  the  chief  restrictions  upon  freedom 
of  movement  at  the  present  time  are  economic  in  nature, 
and  in  this  they  are  quite  correct.  Any  one  who  will 
reflect  upon  the  things  which  he  desires  to  do,  and  upon 
those  restrictions  which  keep  him  from  acting  in  ac- 
cordance with  his  desires,  will  soon  discover  that  the 
restrictions  upon  his  movements  rarely  proceed  from 
government,  but  generally  have  their  origin  in  lack  of 
resources.  A  poor  man  wishes  to  spend  the  winter  in 
Egypt  because  he  has  consumption.  No  statute  stands 
in.  the  way,  and  yet  he  is  as  unable  to  go  as  he  would  be 
if  prohibited  by  ten  thousand  legislative  enactments. 
But  this  is  not  all.  Restrictions  proceed  from  lack  of 


208  SOCIALISM  AND   SOCIAL  REFORM. 

economic  resources,  and  compulsion  is  connected  with 
our  economic  necessities.  We  see  men  in  society  coming 
and  going  as  bidden  by  others.  A  few  men,  compara- 
tively, say  to  thousands  and  tens  of  thousands  "  go,"  and 
they  go  ;  "  come,"  and  they  come.  We  can  witness  this 
in  any  factory.  We  have  simply  to  step  out  of  our 
houses  into  the  streets  to  find  the  many  obeying  the 
commands  of  the  few.  Why  do  they  do  so  ?  Are  they 
compelled  to  do  so  by  statute  law  ?  Only  in  rare  cases. 
Where,  then,  is  the  seat  of  authority  ?  It  is  found  in 
private  property,  which,  according  to  its  very  definition, 
carries  with  it  the  right  to  exercise  control  over  other 
men  with  respect  to  the  objects  of  private  property. 
Consequently,  we  hear  the  socialists  using  the  expres- 
sion, "  wage-slave,"  —  a  slavery  which  they  maintain 
arises  out  of  the  nature  of  the  present  society.  We  must 
have  authority  if  we  are  to  have  industrial  organization. 
But  what  shall  be  the  seat  of  authority  ?  This  brings 
us  at  once  face  to  face  with  one  of  the  critical  points 
in  socialism.  Will  authority  be  more  wisely  exercised 
when  it  finds  its  seat  in  government  than  when  it  finds 
its  seat  in  private  property  ?  Or  is  it  perchance  a  mixed 
system  which  affords  the  greatest  guaranties  of  full 
and  free  opportunity  for  the  development  of  all  our 
faculties  ? 

The  socialists  have  yet  something  else  to  urge.  They 
tell  us  that  the  ideal  freedom  in  industrial  life,  which 
many  have  sought,  is  that  which  belongs  to  an  earlier 
stage  of  economic  development ;  namely,  the  stage  of 
small  industries.  When  production  is  carried  on  on  a 
large  scale,  men  must  act  together.  This  cannot  be 
otherwise.  But  socialism  proposes  that  the  workers 
owning  the  tools  of  industry  shall  themselves  partici- 


\ 
SOCIALISM  A   MENACE   TO  LIBERTY.         209 

pate  in  the  enactment  of  the  regulations  which  they  must 
obey.  They  also  evidently  regard  the  material  sphere 
of  existence  as  merely  a  means  to  an  end ;  and  they  look 
to  the  time,  free  from  toil,  which  they  expect  socialism 
will  give  them,  and  the  resources  which  they  will  then 
enjoy,  for  the  best  opportunities  of  free  development  and 
free  movemAt.  The  main  thing  with  them  seems  to  be 
liberty  outside  the  economic  sphere ;  and  now  they  claim 
they  do  not  enjoy  this.  The  position  of  the  socialists 
in  this  respect  will,  perhaps,  be  made  clearer  by  two 
quotations  taken  from  writers  who  very  well  describe 
the  socialistic  position,  although,  possibly,  they  are  not 
themselves  avowed  socialists. 

"What  is  liberty  with  long  hours  and  low  wages?  Is  it 
liberty  ?  Can  liberty  exist  with  long  hours  and  low  wages  ? 
What  rubbish  it  is  to  say  that  we  enjoy  liberty,  when  we  work 
for  a  bare  subsistence,  and  toil  only  to  keep  body  and  soul 
together;  and  at  that,  only  succeed  in  doing  so  for  a  short 
time.  Look  at  the  condition  of  the  masses.  What  is  life  or 
liberty  to  the  majority  of  them  ?  Life  is  a  burden,  and  liberty 
a  mere  mockery.  For  the  exploiters,  it  is  different;  they  enjoy 
life  and  liberty  through  big  profits."  1 

"  The  Declaration  of  Independence  yesterday  meant  self-gov- 
ernment; to-day  it  means  self-employment,  which  is  but  another 
name  for  self-government.  .  .  .  Not  as  an  exception,  but  univer- 
sally, labor  is  doing  what  it  does  not  want  to  do,  and  not  getting 
what  it  wants  or  what  it  needs.  Laborers  want  to  work  eight  hours 
a  day;  they  must  work  ten,  fourteen,  eighteen.  Crying  to  their 
employers,  to  congress,  to  legislatures  to  be  rescued,  they  go  down 
under  the  murderous  couplers  and  wheels  of  the  railroads  faster 
than  if  they  were  in  active  service  in  war,  marching  out  of  one 
battle  into  another.  They  want  to  send  their  children  to  school ; 
they  must  send  them  to  the  factory.  They  want  their  wives  to 

1  From  the  Paterson  Labor  Standard,  quoted  by  the  Carpenter  for 
November,  1893. 


210  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

keep  house  for  them;  but  they,  too,  must  throw  some  shuttle  or 
guide  some  wheel.  They  must  work  when  they  are  sick;  they 
must  stop  work  at  another's  will;  they  must  work  life  out  to  keep 
life  in.  The  people  have  to  ask  for  work,  and  then  do  not  get  it. 
They  have  to  take  less  than  a  fair  share  of  the  product;  they 
have  to  risk  life,  limb,  or  health  —  their  own,  their  wives',  their 
children's  —  for  others'  selfishness  or  whim.  They  continue,  for 
fear,  to  lead  lives  that  force  them  to  do  to  others^lhe  cheapening 
and  wrongs  of  which  they  complain  when  done  to  them."  1 


There  are,  moreover,  not  wanting  those  who  claim  that 
the  public  service,  even  to-day,  is  that  in  which  there  is 
found  the  greater  liberty.  The  workingmen  of  Belgium, 
we  are  told,  prefer  to  work  in  the  government  railway 
shops  rather  than  in  those  belonging  to  private  railway 
corporations ;  and  in  Germany,  we  do  not  see  that  railway 
employees  have  suffered  any  additional  restrictions  upon 
their  liberty  since  the  railways  passed  under  public  own- 
ership and  management.  The  interferences  of  private 
corporations,  both  with  their  employees  and  with  others 
who  are  obnoxious  to  them,  —  in  short,  their  general 
tryanny  and  oppression,  —  are  further  cited.  In  all  fair- 
ness, it  should  also  not  be  forgotten  that  those  univer- 
sities which  taught  the  world  the  value  of  freedom  in 
learning  and  in  imparting  instruction  are  the  German 
state  universities,  which  are,  perhaps,  those  to-day  offer- 
ing greater  guaranties  to  professors  against  interferences 
with  their  liberty  than  do  any  other  universities;  and 
they  are  undoubtedly  far  ahead,  in  this  respect,  of  the 
private  foundations  in  the  United  States.  The  imper- 
sonal nature  of  the  state  itself  seems  to  afford  a  certain 
protection.  The  state  does  not  follow  one  up  relentlessly 

1  From  "  The  Safety  of  the  Future  lies  in  Organized  Labor,"  an 
address  by  H.  D.  Lloyd,  before  the  Thirteenth  Annual  Convention 
of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor. 


SOCIALISM  A  MENACE  TO  LIBERTY.         211 

and  persecute  one  continuously,  as  private  persons  some- 
times do.  The  state  has  a  poor  memory  for  offences 
against  itself.  It  is  not  entirely  insignificant  that  the 
presidency  of  one  of  the  most  important  State  univer- 
sities in  the  United  States  was  recently  offered  to  a 
scholar  who  had  attacked  State  universities  very  strongly 
and  made,  perhaps,  as  able  an  argument  as  one  could 
against  their  very  right  to  exist. 

There  is  still  a  further  argument  in  favor  of  the 
position  of  the  socialists,  although  the  socialists  them- 
selves have  frequently  overlooked  it.  A  recent  advocate 
of  socialism  admits  that,  under  socialism,  there  would  be 
only  one  employer.  But  he  was  not  by  any  means  called 
upon  to  make  this  admission.  We  have,  in  the  United 
States,  some  forty-four  commonwealths  and  many  local 
political  units,  in  addition  to  the  national  government. 
While  these  local  political  units  would,  under  socialism, 
have  to  act,  in  the  main,  according  to  some  common 
principles,  it  is  not  by  any  means  necessary  that  they 
should  all  have  one  administration.  There  is  no  reason 
why  the  various  units,  the  nation,  the  State,  and  the  city, 
or  other  local  political  unit,  should  not  be  relatively  as 
free  in  their  administrations  as  to-day.  At  the  present 
time,  one  who  is  oppressed  or  wronged  in  the  national  civil 
service  may  frequently  find  employment  in  the  service 
of  a  commonwealth  or  of  a  city.  It  will  happen  at  times 
that  one  party  will  be  in  power  in  the  nation,  another  in 
the  State,  and  a  third  in  the  city ;  and  this  cannot  fail 
to  offer  a  measure  of  protection.  German  professors,  in 
earlier  times,  who  were  oppressed  in  a  university  in  one 
German  state,  frequently  found  protection  and  opportu- 
nities in  a  university  in  another  state.  And  why  a  mul- 
tiplicity of  states  should  not  still  afford  a  measure  of 


212  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

protection  under  socialism,  it  is  hard  to  conceive.  It  is 
altogether  probable  that  the  federal  form  of  government 
is,  on  this  account,  as  well  as  on  account  of  the  facilities 
which  it  affords  for  experimentation,  that  one  which  is 
most  favorable  to  socialism.  There  appears  to  be  no 
reason  why,  under  socialism,  we  in  the  United  States 
should  be  obliged  to  abandon  any  one  of 'our  political 
subdivisions ;  and  it  would  be  a  grievous  mistake  from 
the  socialistic  standpoint  to  denounce  the  American  com- 
monwealth. While  some  different  distribution  of  powers 
would  be  necessitated,  it  is  not^lear  that  the  State  and 
the  local  political  unit  would  not  occupy  relatively  quite 
as  important  positions  as  they  do  to-day. 

The  position  of  the  socialists,  then,  is  a  far  stronger 
one  than  is  ordinarily  supposed,  and  yet  it  does  not 
appear  to  the  author  of  the  present  work  entirely  satis- 
factory. He  cannot  forget  that  the  world's  history  is  a 
warning  against  unchecked  and  unfettered  power.  It  is 
true  that  there  would  be  different  political  units,  afford- 
ing far  better  protection  than  is  generally  supposed ;  but 
even  when  this  is  acknowledged,  it  must  not  be  forgotten 
what  a  tremendous  power  a  political  faction  would  have, 
once  it  gained  control  of  even  a  large  part  of  the  country. 
There  must  be  at  least  some  government ;  and  to  talk 
about  "  administration  of  things,"  in  the  place  of  "  gov- 
ernment of  persons,"  does  not  do  away  with  this  necessity. 
Even  if  the  functions  of  government  should  be  reduced 
to  the  lowest  terms  compatible  with  socialism,  those  in 
whose  hands  were  centred  political  and  economic  control 
would  have  tremendous  power,  however  they  might  be 
selected  or  appointed.  Nor  can  we  forget  the  possibilities 
of  combinations  between  different  parties  for  certain  pur- 
poses. It  would,  under  socialism,  be  quite  possible  for 


SOCIALISM  A  MENACE   TO  LIBERTY.         213 

two  or  three  parties  to  act  together,  as  sometimes  they 
do  now.  The  frequent  assertion  that  the  Democratic  and 
Republican  parties  have  acted  together  in  New  York  City 
to  control  the  civil  service,  seems  to  be  well  founded; 
and  it  is  quite  conceivable  that  two  or  three  parties 
might  act  together  to  promote  the  interests  favorable  to 
a  few  leaders,  and  to  keep  down,  if  not  persecute,  obnox- 
ious persons.  We  have  a  still  better  illustration  than 
that  afforded  by  a  combination  of  political  parties  in  a 
city  like  New  York  to  control  the  civil  service.  The 
Christian  Church  and  secular  governments,  in  the  early 
centuries  of  our  era,  existed  as  two  separate  powers. 
Their  spheres  seemed  to  be  so  entirely  different  that  a 
person  might  have  supposed  that  one  would  afford  ample 
protection  against  the  excesses  and  abuses  of  the 
other;  but  such  was  not  the  case,  for  now  the  one  and 
now  the  other  was  in  the  ascendency,  and  the  one  in 
power  used  the  other  for  purposes  of  cruel  wrong  and 
oppressive  tyranny.  We  must  finally  bear  in  mind  the 
most  important  fact,  that  restrictions  need  not  necessa- 
rily proceed  from  the  base,  but  that  they  can  also  pro- 
ceed from  the  conscientious,  and  that  those  restrictions 
upon  desirable  liberty  which  find  their  foundation  in 
conscience,  even  if  it  is  a  perverted  conscience,  are  most 
dangerous.  Those  guilty  of  oppression  in  the  Christian 
Church  were  often  men  who  acted  conscientiously.  They 
did  that  which  they  believed  to  be  right.  Let  us  suppose 
that  in  any  country  the  prohibitionists  should  gain  the 
ascendency.  The  fact  that  they  are  such  conscientious 
people  would  compel  them  to  use  every  means  in  their 
power  to  prevent  the  expression  of  opinions  which  they 
might  regard  as  most  dangerous.  They  could  hardly 
prevent  the  use  of  the  printing-press,  but  they  might 


214  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM 

here  and  there  interfere  with  the  right  of  free  and  open 
speech  ;  and,  in  control  of  the  central  government,  they 
might  interfere  with  the  circulation  of  literature  to  them 
obnoxious.  The  reader  may  say,  "  But  I  think  this  is  an 
excellent  argument  in  favor  of  socialism,  because  prohi- 
bition is  altogether  a  desirable  thing."  But,  altogether 
apart  from  the  fact  that  very  many  will  not  agree  with 
him,  he  should  bear  in  mind  that  what  would  be  possible 
with  reference  to  prohibition,  would  be  possible  with 
reference  to  the  free  expression  and  circulation  of  views 
on  other  topics. 


SOCIALISM  AS  A  SCIIEME  OF  PRODUCTION.     215 


CHAPTER  VI. 

OBJECTIONS  TO   SOCIALISM   AS    A   SCHEME   OP 
PRODUCTION. 

SOCIALISM  means  a  unification  of  industry.  It  is 
based  upon  the  hypothesis  that  it  is  possible  to  organize 
every  branch  of  industry  as  a  unit.  It  is,  indeed,  main- 
tained by  adherents  of  the  purely  evolutionary  theory 
of  socialism,  that  unification  or  monopoly  in  every  branch 
of  industry  is  an  inevitable  outcome  of  industrial  devel- 
opment. If  this  is  so,  we  would  have  only  to  choose 
between  private  and  public  monopoly,  and  this  would 
mean  that  socialism  was  not  merely  possible,  but  inevi- 
table, because  there  could  be  no  hesitation  in  regard  to 
our  choice  if  we  were  obliged  to  choose  between  the 
irresponsible  domination  of  private  trusts,  and  socialism, 
for  the  latter  signifies  equally  centralized  production,  but 
production  under  the  control  of  representatives  respon- 
sible to  the  people. 

We  are  again  brought  face  to  face  with  one  of  the  most 
difficult  and  critical  question  in  the  discussion  of  social- 
ism. We  see  the  work  of  combination  and  consolidation 
going  on  about  us.  What  will  be  the  outcome  ?  We 
must  not  shut  our  eyes  to  the  fact,  and  we  must  admit 
frankly,  that  universal  private  monopoly  would  only  mean 
the  final  substitution  of  public  for  private  control;  in 
other  words,  again,  socialism.  When  we  examine  the  vari- 
ous industries  carefully,  we  find  that  it  is  necessary  to 
classify  them,  for  it  is  by  no  means  inevitable  that  the 


216  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

same  law  of  development  holds  for  all.  The  alleged  ten- 
dency to  monopoly  is  frankly  admitted  with  reference  to 
a  whole  class  of  businesses,  which  we  call  natural  monopo- 
lies. We  will  return  to  the  discussion  of  these  later ; 
but  now  attention  is  called  to  the  fact  that  they  include 
enterprises  like  railways,  highways,  telegraphs,  harbors, 
street-car  lines,  electric-lighting  plants,  gas-works,  water- 
works, etc.  They  also  include  the  exploitation  of  natural 
resources  so  limited  in  extent  that  a  combination  of  men 
can  acquire  the  entire  supply.  Possibly  anthracite  coal 
and  petroleum  will  illustrate  this  class;  perhaps,  also, 
natural  gas  should  be  included.  As  we  have  admitted  the 
principle  of  monopoly  with  respect  to  these  pursuits,  we 
have  also  admitted  that  the  socialistic  plan  of  production 
is  possible  for  them.  We  also  observe  that  collective 
ownership  of  all  property  of  the  kind  mentioned,  and  the 
collective  management  of  businesses  connected  with  this 
property,  are  possible. 

But  we  witness  the  existence  of  trusts  outside  of  this 
field,  especially  in  manufacturing,  and  the  claim  is 
made  that  the  tendency  of  manufactures  is  inevitably 
towards  monopoly.  We  should  always  bear  in  mind, 
however,  the  contrast  between  production  on  a  large 
scale  and  monopoly.  Production  on  a  very  large  scale 
may  exist  together  with  the  sharpest  competition.  The 
question  is  not  whether  production  will  be  carried  on 
on  a  large  scale,  and  whether  such  production  is  inevi- 
table, but  whether  it  is  possible  to  organize  each  promi- 
nent branch  of  manufactures  as  a  single  whole.  Can 
every  main  line  of  manufacturing  industry  be  brought 
under  unified  control  ?  is  the  same  question  put  in  a 
different  form.  Socialism  affirms  that  this  is  possible, 
and  some  socialists,  as  we  have  seen,  affirm  not  only 


SOCIALISM  AS  A   SCHEME  OF  PRODUCTION.      217 

that  it  is  possible,  but  that  it  is  inevitable.  They  assert 
that  every  business  is  a  natural  monopoly,  and  that  the 
expression  itself,  "  natural  monopoly,"  is  as  much  out  of 
place  as  would  be  the  expression  "natural  adults,"  with 
reference  to  human  beings.  Every  human  being  becomes 
in  time  an  adult,  and  so,  they  say,  every  business  be- 
comes in  time  a  monopoly.  Proof  is  sought  in  a  long 
list  of  trusts  and  combinations  which  have  been  more 
or  less  successful.  When  we  look  into  this  list  of  trusts 
in  manufactures,  however,  we  quickly  ascertain  that 
few  of  them  have  achieved  anything  like  complete  mo- 
nopoly ;  and  if  we  examine  the  list  of  unsuccessful  at- 
tempts to  form  trusts,  we  shall  discover  that  this  is 
longer  than  the  list  of  partially  successful  trusts.  What 
we  ascertain  in  reality  is  a  demonstration  of  the  advan- 
tages of  production  on  a  large  scale,  and  a  few  attempts 
to  secure  a  monopoly  which  have  been  partially  success- 
ful, and  a  far  larger  number  of  cases  of  failure  to  estab- 
lish monopoly  in  manufacturing  industries.  So  far  as 
any  historical  inductive  proof  is  concerned,  we  must  say 
that  it  is,  as  yet,  lacking.  The  careful  thinker  will  at 
least  demand  time  for  further  observation.  He  will  tell 
us  to  wait  and  see  what  tendencies  are  revealed  by  sub- 
sequent industrial  development.  If  we  turn  to  deduc- 
tive proof,  however,  no  convincing  arguments  have  been 
advanced  to  support  the  hypothesis,  either  that  unifica- 
tion of  manufactures  is,  generally  speaking,  inevitable, 
or  even  possible.  We  must  not  overlook  the  immense 
difficulty  of  a  management  so  watchful,  so  alert,  so  full 
of  resources,  so  fruitful  in  initiative  and  enterprise,  that 
it  can  permanently  secure  better  results  than  a  number 
of  smaller  and  competing  manufacturers.  We  may  say, 
furthermore,  that  the  tendencies  to  form  monopolies 


218  SOCIALISM  AND   SOCIAL  REFORM. 

in  manufactures  can  sometimes  be  explained  by  a  tariff 
policy  favorable  to  combinations,  or  by  special  favors 
received  at  the  hands  of  those  conducting  railways 
and  other  natural  monopolies,  whose  services  are  in- 
dispensable. 

Naturally,  it  would  carry  us  too  far,  and  require  too 
much  space,  to  discuss  this  question  exhaustively.  We 
can  claim,  however,  safely,  that  the  burden  of  proof  rests 
upon  the  advocates  of  the  theory  of  monopoly,  and  that 
they  have  not  yet  produced  the  proof,  so  far  as  manufac- 
tures are  concerned.  Even  if  certain  great  lines  of  man- 
ufacturing should  be  conducted  in  accordance  with  the 
principles  of  socialism,  there  would  still  remain  a  large 
number  of  manufacturers  producing  on  a  comparatively 
small  scale,  chiefly  for  local  needs,  whose  productive  ope- 
rations could  not  well  be  unified. 

Foreign  commerce  is  of  less  importance,  but  yet  of  vast 
significance,  and  it  is  not  easy  to  see  how  this  could  be 
carried  on  under  socialism.  A  chief  difficulty  would  be 
the  adjustment  of  values,  and  the  determination  of  the  ex- 
tent to  which  international  exchanges  should  be  effected. 
In  the  absence  of  a  common  organization,  including  the 
nations  making  the  exchanges,  it  would  seem  necessary 
to  fix  values  and  regulate  exchanges  in  accordance  with 
existing  methods ;  and  yet,  the  basis  of  existing  methods 
in  the  present  order  would  be  wanting.  Then  there  would 
be  the  further  danger  that  a  nation  still  capitalistic  would, 
through  foreign  commerce,  impede,  if  not  upset,  the  ar- 
rangements of  the  socialistic  state. 

But,  even  should  the  position  of  the  socialists  be  proved 
with  respect  to  manufactures  and  foreign  commerce,  it 
would  further  be  necessary  to  prove  it  with  respect  to 
agriculture.  Socialism  means  that  socialistic  production 


SOCIALISM  AS  A  SCHEME  OF  PRODUCTION.    219 

and  distribution  is  to  dominate  our  economic  life,  and 
should  every  other  pursuit  be  conducted  according  to 
the  principles  of  socialism,  and  agriculture  be  left  out,  we 
should  have  something  very  different  from  socialism,  be- 
cause a  large  proportion,  and,  in  many  countries,  more 
than  half  the  population,  would  not  be  included  within 
the  socialistic  organization.  It  can  safely  be  asserted 
that  no  plan  which  is  even  plausible  has  been  adduced 
for  the  organization  of  agriculture  according  to  the  de- 
mands of  socialism.  The  tendency  to  production,  even 
on  an  increasingly  large  scale,  is  so  uncertain  that  it 
does  not  seem  to  have  received  clear  historical  and 
statistical  proof.  An  examination  of  the  results  of  his- 
torical and  statistical  inquiry  leaves  us  in  doubt.  The 
German  socialists  rely  greatly  upon  more  or  less  correct 
reports  of  farming  on  a  large  scale  which  they  receive 
from  the  United  States.  They  attribute  the  effective- 
ness of  American  agriculture  in  competition,  to  the  use 
of  improved  machinery,  and  to  the  introduction  of 
capitalistic  methods  in  American  farming.  They  dwell 
largely  upon  the  stories  told  of  the  so-called  bonanza 
farms.  The  careful  observer  in  America,  however,  sees 
many  different  tendencies  at  work.  While  in  parts  of  the 
country,  especially  where  a  few  great  staples  dominate, 
agricultural  production  is  in  some  instances  conducted 
on  a  very  large  scale,  elsewhere  the  large  farms  are 
divided  and  subdivided :  and  practical  farmers  frequently 
claim  that  he  who  would  attain  the  best  results  must  be 
careful  not  to  attempt  farming  on  too  large  a  scale. 
Every  one  who  has  had  experience  of  farming  in  the 
United  States  knows  that  many  have  found  it  decidedly 
to  their  advantage  to  sell  a  part  of  their  land,  and  to 
restrict  the  scale  of  their  operations.  At  one  time,  in- 


220  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL   REFORM. 

deed,  the  feeling  in  favor  of  farming  on  a  small  scale 
found  expression  in  the  watch-word,  "  Ten  acres  enough ! " 
Generally  speaking,  when,  in  any  part  of  the  country,  we 
find  farmers  passing  over  from  extensive  to  intensive 
agriculture,  the  tendency  seems  to  be  to  break  up  the 
large  farms  into  smaller  farms.  An  illustration  which 
has  fallen  under  the  observation  of  the  author  is  that  of 
grape  culture  in  western  New  York.  This  grape  culture 
took  the  place  of  general  farming,  and  especially  the  pro- 
duction of  milk,  butter,  and  cheese,  and  resulted  in  a 
great  increase  in  the  number  of  holdings.  Many  parts 
of  the  country  are  so  varied  in  the  quality  of  the  soil 
and  in  situation  that  production  must  be  carried  on  on  a 
small  scale  to  secure  the  best  results,  because  the  farmer 
must  know  every  acre  of  his  land  accurately.  One  field 
of  five  acres  will  be  especially  well  adapted  to  barley; 
another  field  of  twenty  acres  is  an  excellent  meadow; 
possibly  a  tract  of  land  including  thirty  acres  is  best 
adapted  for  pasturage ;  while  a  field  of  five  acres  at  the 
opposite  extremity  of  the  farm,  which  alone  of  all  the 
farm  has  a  gravelly  soil,  is  best  adapted  to  small  fruits. 
Facts  like  these  are  overlooked  by  those  writers,  especially 
foreign  writers,  who  appear  to  imagine  that  the  whole  of 
the  United  States  resembles  certain  portions  of  the  North- 
west, where  land  is  found  with  soil  evidently  uniform  in 
its  situation  and  qualities,  and  where  the  production  of 
one  or  two  staple  articles,  by  extensive  agriculture,  is 
advantageous. 

Now,  if  all  this  is  admitted,  —  and  it  certainly  can- 
not be  maintained  that  the  opposite  has  been  proved, 
—  the  socialistic  position  is  untenable  with  respect  to 
agriculture.  Socialists  themselves  acknowledge  that 
private  ownership  of  the  soil  is  required  for  the  pursuit 


SOCIALISM  AS  A  SCHEME  OF  PRODUCTION.     221 

of  agriculture  on  a  small  scale.1  The  unification  of  agri- 
culture as  a  pursuit  requires  not  only  careful  knowledge 
of  all  the  land  which  is  under  one  management,  but  it 
implies  a  unified  organization  of  labor.  There  must  be 
some  central  administrative  authority,  which  can  have 
supervision  over  all  the  workers,  assigning  to  each  one 
his  task,  and  able  to  see  that  he  performs  it  faithfully. 
Production  on  a  large  scale,  under  a  single  management, 
whether  this  be  public  or  private,  implies  something  like 
a  military  organization.  We  readily  see  how  this  can 
be  applied  to  railways  and  like  pursuits,  and  to  many 
branches  of  manufacturing,  but  it  is  not  clear  that  it  is 
applicable  to  agriculture.  On  the  contrary,  the  difficul- 
ties in  the  way  of  such  an  organization  of  agricultural 
workers  seem  to  be  insurmountable.  The  successful 
farmer  keeps  a  constant  watch  over  all  his  force ;  they 
are  under  his  eyes  continually,  and  the  geographical  ex- 
tent of  agricultural  operations  limits  the  possibilities  of 
unified  management. 

There  is,  furthermore,  reason  to  fear  that  socialism  does 
not  supply  adequate  motives  for  economic  activity  to 
men  so  imperfectly  developed  as  those  with  whom  we 
must  deal.  Competition  is  one  of  the  chief  motives, 
although  not  the  only  motive,  keeping  in  operation  the 
wheels  of  industry  at  the  present  time.  Competition,  in 
the  large  sense,  means  the  straggle  of  individual  inter- 
ests on  the  basis  of  the  existing  social  order,  which  in- 
cludes, as  its  fundamental  features,  private  property, 

1  This  view  is  expressed  by  Kautsky  in  his  "  Erfurter  Programm," 
and  is  characteristic  of  a  purely  evolutionary  socialism.  A  Fabian 
socialist  raises  the  question  whether  we  could  not  have  public  owner- 
ship of  land,  with  private  management.  Possibly;  yet  this  would 
give  us  something  quite  different  from  pure  socialism. 


222  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

freedom  of  person,  free  contract,  and  vested  interests. 
Competition  means  the  freedom  of  an  individual  acting 
upon  the  basis  of  the  existing  order,  and  otherwise  within 
certain  legally  established  limits,  to  care  for  his  own  in. 
terests  in  economic  affairs,  —  to  secure  the  highest  price 
obtainable  for  the  goods  and  services  which  he  desires  to 
dispose  of,  and,  on  the  other  hand,  to  procure  goods  and 
services  at  the  lowest  prices  which  he  can  induce  any  one 
to  accept.  Free  competition  means  rivalry  and  conflict, 
because  manifestly  when  several  persons  are  seeking  the 
same  thing  not  all  can  get  it.  It  signifies  the  attempt  of 
different  persons  to  render  the  same  service  or  to  sell  the 
same  kind  of  commodities  to  a  given  person.  If  one  is 
accepted,  the  others  must  be  rejected. 

Competition  has  been  called  brutal,  and  it  is  so  in 
many  respects.  It  crushes  human  beings  by  the  thou- 
sand, and  continually  throws  out  of  the  industrial  field 
an  immense  amount  of  human  rubbish,  which  is  unable 
to  maintain  itself  in  the  competitive  world.  We  may 
take  the  case  of  manufacturers  competing  with  one 
another.  Each  one  tries  to  sell  his  products,  and  often 
to  exclude  others  from  the  market.  Other  things  being 
equal,  the  larger  the  sales  the  larger  the  gains  of  the 
manufacturer.  But  when  several  are  trying  to  sell 
goods  to  the  same  person,  the  one  who  offers  the  goods 
at  the  lowest  price  will  be  the  successful  person  under 
the  system  of  free  competition.  The  question,  then, 
which  confronts  the  manufacturer  is  this :  How  to  pro- 
duce goods  at  the  lowest  price,  if  possible  at  a  lower 
price  than  others,  and  in  vast  quantities  ?  As  the  cost  of 
labor  is  a  principal  item  in  the  entire  cost  of  the  product, 
the  first  thing  which  suggests  itself  is  to  reduce  wages, 
then  to  extend  the  length  of  the  working  day,  which 


SOCIALISM  AS  A   SCHEME  OF  PRODUCTION.     223 

means  procuring  a  greater  amount  of  labor  for  the  same 
pay,  then  to  drive  labor  more  remorselessly,  and  then  to 
replace  the  labor  of  grown  men  by  the  labor  of  women 
and  children,  who  ought  not  to  work  away  from  home  at 
all.  These  instances  might  be  multiplied  indefinitely, 
and  socialists  have  portrayed  them  vividly,  and  deserve 
praise  for  forcing  them  upon  our  attention. 

Another  class  of  evils  connected  with  this  rivalry  in 
buying  and  selling  comprises  those  which  find  expression 
in  poor  quality  of  workmanship,  in  the  use  of  inferior 
materials,  in  the  adulteration  of  products,  all  designed 
to  deceive  the  ultimate  purchaser,  and  make  him  think 
that  he  is  getting  something  different  from  that  which  is 
really  offered  him.  It  is  not  possible,  then,  to  entertain 
the  exaggerated  claims  often  put  forward  in  behalf  of 
competition.  The  modern  competitive  system  has  not 
existed  long,  but  it  has  produced  much  evil.  It  is  not 
by  any  means  the  exclusive  force  which  has  brought 
about  the  present  civilization,  and  to  claim  that  it  has 
given  the  modern  wage-earner  a  more  desirable  material 
existence  than  that  enjoyed  in  earlier  ages  by  kings  and 
nobles  is  an  absurdity  which  it  is  only  possible  for  those 
to  maintain  who  entirely  fail  to  appreciate  the  essential 
elements  in  comfortable  living  on  the  material  side. 

It  must  still  further  be  admitted  that  progress  fre- 
quently lies  in  the  suppression  of  competition,  which  is 
the  contest  for  material  gain,  and  the  substitution  there- 
for of  emulation,  which  may  be  regarded  as  the  struggle 
for  approbation.  Our  law  and  medical  schools,  and  edu- 
cational institutions  generally,  have  improved  precisely 
in  proportion  as  they  have  outgrown  the  competitive 
principle.  Those  medical  schools  which  are  still  con- 
ducted as  private  institutions  designed  to  secure  the 


224  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL   11EFOEM. 

highest  pecuniary  returns  to  their  managers,  are  inferior 
institutions,  which  bring  disgrace  upon  the  medical  pro- 
fession in  the  United  States.  We  call  their  condition 
one  of  degradation.  That  university  which  is  conducted 
on  the  principles  of  commercial  competition  is  a  poor 
affair  indeed.  It  is  in  particular  unfortunate  that  the 
salary  of  a  professor  should  have  any  connection  with 
the  success  of  the  institution  which  employs  him,  if 
"  success  "  is  used  in  a  competitive  sense.  As  the  supe- 
rior schools  of  the  country,  however,  have  improved,  a 
strong  spirit  of  emulation  has  been  increasingly  substi- 
tuted for  the  competitive  principle.  Hospitals  conducted 
according  to  mercantile  principles  are  .viewed  with  suspi- 
cion ;  and  if  it  is  known  that  a  hospital  in  any  part  of  the 
country  is  in  no  sense  dependent  upon  its  earnings,  and 
that  the  physicians  care  little  about  these,  that  hospital 
unfailingly  inspires  confidence.  The  same  holds  in  still 
higher  degree  with  respect  to  asylums  for  the  insane. 
Public  management  has  sins  enough  to  answer  for;  but 
it  would  be  hard  for  public  management  at  its  worst  to 
duplicate  the  abuses  and  atrocities  connected  with  the 
care  of  the  insane  in  England,  when  it  was  left  to  private 
competitive  industry.1  Literature  is  mean  and  contemp- 
tible when  it  falls  under  the  domination  of  competition  ; 
and  architecture  has  achieved  its  grandest  triumphs  when 
competition  has  been  weak  in  society. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  should  be  acknowledged  freely 
that  competition  has  led  to  numberless  inventions  and 
improvements  in  the  technical  processes  of  production, 
and  that  it  has  played  a  very  large  part  in  the  material 
progress  of  the  present  century.  Oppression  and  degra- 

1  Cf.  the  description  given  in  Hodder's  "Life  and  Works  of  the 
{Seventh  Earl  of  Shaftesbury," 


SOCIALISM  AS  A   SCHEME   OF  PRODUCTION.      225 

dation  of  labor  are  not  the  only  means  to  bring  about  a 
reduction  in  the  expenses  of  production.  Improvements 
which  enable  the  producer  to  accomplish  a  given  result, 
with  the  expenditure  of  a  smaller  amount  of  labor  and 
capital  than  was  previously  required,  have  been  frequent, 
and  these  improvements  signify  social  as  well  as  indi- 
vidual gain.  Now  and  again  it  happens  that  those  who 
attain  a  brilliant  success  in  industry,  even  under  the 
pressure  of  sharp  industrial  competition,  have  treated 
their  industrial  subordinates  well,  and  have  succeeded 
because  they  deserved  success,  having  contributed  largely 
to  material  progress. 

Competition- likewise  affords  a  stimulus  which  human 
nature  needs,  because  competition  rewards  men  for 
achievement.  Competition  keeps  us  alert  and  active, 
because  we  know  that  we  shall  be  punished  by  the  loss 
of  our  industrial  position,  whatever  that  may  be,  if  we 
let  others  get  ahead  of  us  in  the  race  for  the  material 
good  things  of  life.  Undoubtedly,  this  struggle  to  sur- 
pass others  is  not  ethically  the  highest  sort  of  motive; 
but  every  one  must  personally  feel  the  need  of  some  kind 
of  discipline  and  control,  a  spur  to  the  putting  forth  of 
his  best  powers.  Competition  also  may  be  looked  at  not 
merely  as  an  attempt  to  get  ahead  of  somebody  else,  but 
as  an  endeavor  to  render  the  highest  social  service  for 
the  smallest  return.  This  is  the  best  aspect  of  competi- 
tion, and  it  must  not  be  overlooked.  A  and  B  both  want 
to  sell  to  C  a  commodity.  If  A  offers  his  commodity 
at  a  lower  price  than  B  is  willing  to  take,  he  has  rendered 
a  greater  service  to  C  for  a  given  return. 

Competition  has  been  supplanted  recently  in  large  por- 
tions of  the  industrial  field  by  combination  and  partial 
or  complete  monopoly ;  and  many  of  the  evils  from 


226  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL 

which  we  suffer  are  not  the  result  of  competition,  but  of 
the  absence  of  competition.  The  objections  to  trusts 
and  private  monopolies  are  based  precisely  on  the  fact  of 
the  absence  of  competition,  which  places  the  consumer 
in  their  power.  If  we  think  that  one  grocer  is  asking 
too  high  a  price  for  flour  or  potatoes,  we  have  the  oppor- 
tunity to  see  if  we  can  do  better  elsewhere ;  and  the 
efforts  of  several  really  competing  persons  to  sell  com- 
modities of  the  same  kind  to  the  same  person  will  keep 
any  one  from  deriving  more  than  a  legitimate  profit  on 
capital,  and  a  fair  remuneration  for  labor.  Moreover, 
the  danger  of  loss  of  opportunity  to  make  at  least  fair 
profits  and  fair  wages  tends  to  secure  polite  and  atten- 
tive treatment.  When,  however,  we  do  not  like  the 
price  charged  for  gas,  and  believe  that  it  is  exorbitant, 
our  only  recourse,  usually,  is  to  stop  the  use  of  it.  It  is 
not  merely  that,  but  when  we  have  every  reason  to  be- 
lieve that  we  are  charged  with  more  gas  than  we  actu- 
ally consume,  we  must  submit  to  be  robbed  because  the 
single  gas  company  will  otherwise  shut  off  the  supply, 
and  any  remedy  for  the  sufferer  is  too  difficult  to  be 
practically  available.  And  how  unceremonious,  brusque, 
and  even  impudent  are  often  the  agents  of  private  mo- 
nopolies! If  competition  is  brutal,  we  must  remember 
that  its  absence  is  monopoly,  and  the  experience  of  his- 
tory pronounces  private  monopoly  odious. 

What  has  socialism  to  substitute  for  competition  as  a 
force  in  production  ?  Upon  what  can  it  rely  to  keep  in 
motion  the  wheels  of  industry,  and  to  render  progress 
continuous  ?  It  would  seem,  apart  from  the  necessities 
of  life,  which  ordinary  and  indifferent  service  would 
give,  that  socialism  must  rely,  on  the  one  hand,  on  the 
greater  opportunity  for  usefulness  which  superiority 


SOCIALISM  AS  A    SCHEME  OF  PRODUCTION.     227 

would  bring  with  it,  and  on  the  other  upon  honor  or 
social  esteem.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  social  esteem 
has  been  the  most  powerful  motive  which  has  animated 
the  conduct  of  men  in  all  times.  The  Greeks,  to  gain 
the  highest  honor  in  their  games,  would  undergo  long 
and  continuous  toil,  and  put  forth  their  best  powers, 
developed  to  their  utmost.  Not  only  did  the  one  who 
achieved  this  highest  honor  receive  an  immense  triumph, 
but  his  entire  family  also  shared  his  glory.  Men  do  not 
struggle  more  ardently  now  for  millions  of  money  than 
the  Greeks  did  for  the  honors  in  their  games  ;  and,  so  far 
as  the  material  content  of  these  honors  was  concerned, 
that  consisted  of  a  few  leaves,  —  the  wreath  of  wild 
olive !  In  every  college  and  university  in  the  land,  and 
indeed  in  all  lands,  one  may  see  the  force  of  social 
esteem,  and  this  social  esteem  is  not  won  by  success  in 
money-making.  The  atmosphere  of  universities  in  this 
and  other  lands  is  a  democratic  one,  and  he  occupies  the 
first  place  in  the  esteem  of  his  fellows  who  is  successful 
in  the  pursuit  of  knowledge.  Even  in  so  aristocratic  a 
country  as  Germany,  the  careful  observer  says  of  the 
students  in  the  university,  "They  meet  upon  terms  of 
fraternal  equality.  A  common  devotion  to  knowledge, 
without  destroying  the  distinctions  of  birth  and  fortune, 
yet  creates  above  them  a  higher  university,  where  the 
most  intelligent  and  laborious  take  the  first  place."  * 

Our  industrial  life,  even  at  the  present  day,  affords  no 
exception  to  the  rule  that  men  are  animated  by  the  de- 
sire for  social  esteem.  They  toil  for  money  because  they 
believe  that  money  brings  social  esteem  with  it,  and  in 
so  far  as  money  ceases  to  bring  social  esteem  they  cease 
to  toil  for  it.  When  they  have  acquired  it  they  part 
1  See  Sidney  Whitman's  "  Imperial  Germany." 


228  SOCIALISM  AND   SOCIAL  REFORM. 

with  it  to  acquire  social  esteem.  We  may  see  a  man 
toiling  and  moiling  for  money,  sacrificing  his  own  higher 
faculties,  oppressing  his  employees,  and  defrauding  the 
public.  We  say  of  such  a  man  that  he  loves  money 
above  everything  else.  But  let  us  watch  his  career  a 
little  longer.  He  has  acquired  millions,  and  has  led  a 
mean,  contemptible,  and  even  miserly  life ;  but  suddenly 
he  purchases  a  fine  mansion  a-nd  spends  a  hundred  thou- 
sand dollars  for  a  grand  entertainment.  Money  flows 
like  water,  and  it  seems,  perhaps,  that  this  millionaire  is 
now  governed  by  other  motives.  Not  at  all ;  he  sought 
money  because  he  supposed  that  with  it  he  could  pur- 
chase social  esteem.  Either  he  had  these  personal 
expenditures  in  view  from  the  start,  or  he  finds  that 
something  more  than  mere  possessions  is  necessary  to 
give  him  the  esteem  which  he  desires.  An  English 
manufacturer  acquires  a  great  fortune,  and  then  retires 
from  the  business  which  brought  him  his  wealth  to  live 
upon  a  country  estate.  He  voluntarily  abandons  the 
opportunity  to  gain  great  additional  wealth,  because  he 
hopes  that  he  will  enjoy  a  higher  social  position  as  the 
owner  of  large  landed  estates.  The  German  manufac- 
turer who  has,  through  long  self-denial,  won  a  million, 
parts  with  a  considerable  portion  of  his  fortune  to  marry 
his  daughter  to  a  lieutenant  with  sixpence  a  day,  be- 
cause this  lieutenant  can  give  his  daughter  a  higher 
social  position,  and  he  may  bask  in  the  reflected  sun- 
shine of  her  glory.  A  familiar  illustration  is  afforded 
by  the  servant-girl  problem  in  the  United  States.  Amer- 
ican girls  prefer  other  occupations  than  domestic  ser- 
vice, although  they  yield  smaller  pecuniary  returns, 
because,  rightly  01*  wrongly,  they  suppose  that  these 
other  occupations  carry  with  them  a  higher  degree  of 


SOCIALISM  AS  A    SCHEME  OF  P1WDUCTION.    229 

social  esteem ;  and  this  supposition  is  so  generally  enter- 
tained that  it  produces  a  marked  impression  upon  the 
labor  market. 

Social  esteem,  then,  is  an  abundantly  sufficient  motive. 
We  must  concede  that  frankly  to  the  socialists.  But  we 
have  to  ask  the  question,  whether  that  conduct  which  is 
socially  beneficial  would  as  a  rule  meet  with  social  ap- 
probation ?  Those  who  move  among  the  educated  and 
cultured  will  be  readily  inclined,  perhaps,  to  give  an  af- 
firmative answer.  One  acquainted  only  with  university 
life  at  its  best,  and  judging  the  whole  world  by  its  stan- 
dards, would  not  be  inclined  to  entertain  serious  doubts 
in  regard  to  the  line  of  conduct  which  would  meet  with 
general  social  approbation.  We  must  remember,  how- 
ever, that  there  are  many  different  classes  in  society,  and 
that  each  class  has  its  own  standards. 

The  number  of  men  who  act  in  a  manner  which  is  dis- 
advantageous to  society,  is  extremely  large ;  and  perhaps 
one  can  scarcely  be  deemed  guilty  of  pessimism,  if  one 
expresses  the  opinion  that  only  a  minority  of  men  evince 
any  genuine  solicitude  for  the  general  welfare.  Yet 
each  one  is  animated  by  the  desire  for  social  esteem ;  but 
it  is  the  esteem  of  those  about  him,  the  esteem  of  his  own 
class  which  governs  his  conduct.  The  thief  belongs  to 
a  class  that  honors  the  successful  thief;  and  the  daring 
and  successful  bank  robber,  who  daily  hazards  his  own 
life  and  freely  takes  the  lives  of  others,  is  a  hero  of  no 
small  proportions  to  a  very  large  class.  A  recent  robber, 
who  was  shot  while  carrying  out  a  daring  plan  of  rob- 
bery, boasted  that  he  did  not  want  to  be  outdone  by 
those  notorious  Missouri  robbers,  the  James  brothers. 
Men  of  this  sort  are  so  honored  that  accounts  of  their 
lives  are  written,  and  may  be  purchased  at  the  book- 


230          SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

stalls  of  many  a  railway  station.  The  prize-fighter  is 
animated  by  a  desire  for  social  esteem,  and  his  conduct 
is  that  which  meets  with  the  approbation  of  a  consider- 
able proportion  of  the  entire  American  community.  The 
most  prominent  newspapers  in  the  country  publish,  not 
columns,  but  pages,  describing  the  preparations  for  a 
prize-fight,  and  the  fight  itself,  following  it  with  minute 
account  of  the  subsequent  movements  of  the  principal 
actors  in  the  contest.  The  achievements  of  scholars  and 
statesmen,  so  far  as  the  press  of  the  day  is  concerned, 
fade  into  insignificance  when  brought  into  contrast  with 
the  encounters  of  a  champion  pugilist. 

Tax-dodging  and  many  other  practices,  which  are  di- 
rectly anti-social  in  character,  are  indulged  in  freely  by 
those  who  stand  high  in  the  community,  and  who  are  not 
ashamed  of  their  conduct  in  this  respect.  They  do  not, 
on  account  of  their  anti-social  practices,  lose  the  esteem 
of  their  fellows. 

When  we  call  to  mind  all  these  facts,  and  many  others 
which  a  little  reflection  will  suggest  to  the  reader,  can 
we  declare  that  under  socialism  we  have  reason  to  anti- 
cipate that  regularly  that  line  of  conduct  which  is 
socially  beneficial  would  meet  with  social  approbation  ? 
If  we  are  obliged  to  answer  the  question  in  the  negative, 
the  cause  of  socialism  is  at  least  greatly  weakened. 

We  must  examine  this  question  of  the  motives  which 
impel  men  to  action  from  the  psychological  standpoint. 
We  are  not  merely  concerned  with  what  would  be  in  the 
true  interests  of  men,  but  with  their  capacity  to  appre- 
ciate their  social  interests.  We  have  learned  during  gen- 
erations to  look  at  economic  questions  from  the  individual 
standpoint.  Will  it  be  easy  for  us  to  look  at  questions 
concerning  our  material  interests  from  the  social  stand- 


SOCIALISM  AS  A   SCHEME  OF  PRODUCTION.     231 

point  ?  We  do  not  now  generally  appreciate  sufficiently 
the  extent  to  which  our  material  welfare  depends  upon 
society.  Should  we  under  socialism,  when  so  much  more 
depended  upon  society,  appreciate  sufficiently  the  impor- 
tance of  right  social  conduct  ?  It  is  on  the  social  side  of 
man's  nature  that  his  development  is  slowest,  and  social- 
ism implies  a  high  development  of  man  —  and  a  very 
high  development  of  man  —  precisely  on  this  side.  A 
socialist  writer  himself  has  spoken  of  "  the  individualist 
blacks  of  Africa,"  by  which  he  virtually  admits  that 
socialism  is  inconceivable  among  a  people  occupying  so 
low  a  stage  of  civilization.  But  we  have  thousands  and 
millions  of  people  in  the  more  civilized  countries  occupy- 
ing in  social  development  a  position  not  much  higher. 
Most  instructive  are  the  lessons  which  Christianity 
teaches  us.  Christianity  is  a  social  religion,  if  it  is  any- 
thing. Its  founder,  a  Jew,  called  himself  not  a  son  of 
Israel,  but  the  Son  of  man,  to  identify  himself  with  human- 
ity. He  opposed  the  religious  opinions  and  religious  prac- 
tices of  his  day,  on  the  ground  that  they  placed  some 
things  above  the  duty  which  man  owes  to  his  fellows. 
Many  a  child  thought,  and  still  thinks,  that  it  is  more 
important  to  give  to  the  church  than  to  care  for  an  aged 
father  and  mother.  Christ  told  those  who  thought  that  a 
gift  to  the  church  could  justify  one  in  neglecting  to  pro- 
vide for  father  and  mother,  that  they  made  the  word  of 
God  of  no  effect.  When  men  came  to  John  the  Baptist, 
Christ's  predecessor,  inquiring  the  way  of  life,  he  enjoined 
upon  them  the  observance  of  social  duties ;  and  when  men 
asked  Christ  what  they  should  do  to  be  saved,  he  likewise 
bade  them  to  care  for  their  fellows,  telling  one  inquirer  to 
sell  all  that  he  had  and  give  to  the  poor,  and  telling  an- 
other to  follow  the  example  of  the  good  Samaritan.  The 


232  SOCIALISM  AND   SOCIAL  REFORM. 

crowning  act  in  Christ's  mission  manifested  the  social 
side  of  Christianity,  —  he  died  for  others.  Yet  while  all 
this  is  true,  it  has  taken  the  Christian  Church  centuries 
even  to  approximate  the  position  of  Christ  with  respect  to 
the  social*ature  of  religion.  Religion  has  been  treated, 
and  is  still  treated,  as  an  individual  question.  Individ- 
ual salvation  has  been  a  common  and  powerful  phrase, 
and  it  has  not  been  accompanied  by  its  complement, 
social  salvation.  We  may  still  go  into  many  a  prayer- 
meeting,  and  listen  to  prayer  after  prayer  and  address 
after  address,  and  hear  not  one  word  which  would 
indicate  that  the  speaker  recognized  the  existence  of 
any  one  else  in  all  the  universe  outside  himself  and 
Almighty  God.  When  at  last  the  change  begins,  people 
commence  to  write  books  entitled  "  Social  Christianity," 
and  "  The  Philanthropy  of  God ; "  but  the  titles  them- 
selves have  to  many  a  strange  and  startling  sound. 

Many  other  illustrations  of  the  slow  development  of 
man  on  the  social  side  might  be  instanced.  One  is 
afforded  by  ethics,  which  a  great  writer  has  declared 
to  be  the  queen  of  the  social  sciences.  Ethics  has, 
however,  been  pursued  chiefly  as  an  individual  science, 
and  men  are  only  beginning  to  understand  that  it  is 
a  social  science.  Must  we  not,  in  view  of  all  these  facts, 
reach  the  conclusion  that  there  are  limitations  upon 
social  action  found  in  the  backward  state  of  develop- 
ment of  man's  social  nature,  and  that  men  are  still  too 
individualistic  in  their  nature  to  permit  us  to  hope  that 
for  a  long  time  to  come  they  will  be  able  to  conform  to 
the  requirements  of  a  socialistic  state  ? 


SOCIALISM  AS  A  SCHEME   OF.DISTIUIiUTION.     233 


CHAPTER  VII. 

OBJECTIONS   TO   SOCIALISM    AS   A    SCHEME   OP 
DISTRIBUTION   AND    OF    CONSUMPTION. 

WE  have  already  learned  that  socialists  wish  to  secure 
justice  in  distribution,  but  that  they  have  not  been  able 
to  agree  upon  a  standard  of  distributive  justice,  although 
they  now  generally  seem  disposed  to  regard  equality  in 
distribution  as  desirable. 

Equality  is  unquestionably  the  simplest  and  easiest 
solution  of  the  problem  of  distribution  under  socialism ; 
and  it  is  frequently  argued  that  it  meets  all  the  require- 
ments of  distributive  justice,  because  it  is  held  that,  es- 
sentially, one  man  has  rights  equal  to  those  which  any 
other  enjoys. 

Socialism  compels  us  to  agree  upon  a  standard  of  dis- 
tributive justice  which  would  be  generally  acceptable, 
and  which  would  enlist  the  services  of  the  most  gifted 
and  talented  members  of  the  community.  If  we  depart 
from  the  principle  of  equality,  it  is  difficult  in  the  ex- 
treme to  establish  any  standard  in  accordance  with  fixed 
principles,  calculated  to  settle  controversy.  Let  us  sup- 
pose we  decide  to  distribute  material  goods  in  accordance 
with  merit  or  service  rendered.  How  shall  we  decide 
upon  the  value  of  different  services  when  compared  with 
one  another  ?  That  distribution  which  may  be  called 
ideal  is  one  that  leads  to  the  maximum  satisfaction  of 
wants,  —  that  is,  distribution  in  accordance  with  needs. 
This  means  equal  distribution  among  equals,  but  unequal 


234  SOCIALISM  ^AND   SOCIAL  REFORM. 

distribution  among  those  who  are  unequal;  and,  as  a 
matter  of  fact,  inequalities  among  men,  in  capacity  and 
requirements,  are  immense. 

It  is  desirable  to  satisfy  the  most  intense  wants  first, 
and  then  those  less  intense,  and  so  on  down  the  scale.  If 
incomes  were  distributed  equally,  there  are  men  whose 
wants  are  so  limited  that  they  would  have  more  than 
enough  for  the  satisfaction  of  every  need,  while  others 
would  be  deprived  of  the  means  for  the  satisfaction  of 
genuine  and  pressing  wants.  One  person  has  no  special 
intellectual  gifts,  and  can  soon  acquire  all  the  education 
which  will  be  beneficial  to  him,  so  far,  at  any  rate,  as  ed- 
ucation given  in  schools  is  concerned.  Another  has  great 
gifts  which  fit  him  to  become  a  painter,  a  musician,  or  an 
original  scholar.  It  is  in  the  interest  of  society  that  the 
faculties  of  such  a  one  should  be  fully  developed,  and 
that  for  their  development,  the  tools,  implements,  and 
opportunities,  for  the  exercise  of  the  talent,  should  be 
afforded.  Yet  the  education  which  is  required  under 
such  circumstances  is  often  expensive,  including  foreign 
travel  and  study,  after  the  school  education  at  home  is 
completed.  Such  a  person  can  use  advantageously  a  far 
larger  income  than  the  average  mechanic  or  artisan. 

But  how  can  we  approximate  this  distribution  under 
socialism  ?  How  can  we  reach  agreement  in  regard  to 
needs  ?  Each  one  may  appreciate  his  own  needs  suffi- 
ciently, but  will  he  appreciate  the  needs  of  others,  es- 
pecially of  those  who  are  his  natural  superiors,  and  who 
require  ten  times  as  much  as  he  does  ?  Will  the  ordinary 
farmer  or  industrial  toiler  cheerfully  agree  to  the  propo- 
sition that  some  one  else  needs  ten  times  as  much  as  he 
does,  in  order  to  give  equal  satisfaction  of  wants  ?  Un- 
less such  is  the  case,  we  shall  have  dissatisfaction  and 
discontent,  likely  to  impair  the  usefulness  of  socialism. 


SOCIALISM  AS  A   SCHEME  OF  DISTRIBUTION.     235 

And  this  is  not  all.  While  it  may  be  difficult  for  us  to 
come  to  an  agreement  in  regard  to  the  differences  in  the 
value  of  services  rendered  by  various  members  of  the 
community,  a  little  careful  observation  shows  us  that 
the  difference,  after  all,  is  vast.  In  many  a  town,  we  can 
rind  a  single  individual  upon  whom  the  prosperity  of  the 
town  seems  largely  to  depend.  While  he  lives,  the  chief 
enterprises  of  the  place  in  which  he  is  the  leader  thrive ; 
but  upon  his  death,  mistake  after  mistake  is  made  in 
management,  and  prosperity  deserts  the  town.  Every- 
thing else  remains  the  same  as  before,  but  leadership  is 
absent,  and  that  makes  the  difference  between  prosperity 
and  failure.  We  may  take  a  single  industrial  establish- 
ment and  we  shall  find  that,  while  under  one  man  it 
thrives,  under  another  it  languishes.  The  question  of 
success  is  dependent,  above  everything  else,  upon  right 
leadership.  Now,  those  who  have  superior  gifts  and  ca- 
pacities are  generally  well  aware  of  their  superiority. 
They  know  that  they  render  more  valuable  services  than 
others ;  and  if  we  take  men  as  they  are  now,  or  as  they 
are  likely  to  be  for  a  long  time,  we  have  every  reason  to 
believe  that  an  assignment  of  merely  equal  income  would 
not  enlist  in  socialistic  production  the  most  capable  mem- 
bers of  the  community,  in  such  a  manner  that  they  would 
give  their  best  energies  to  the  socialistic  state ;  but  un- 
less we  could  secure  from  the  most  talented  members  of 
the  community  willing  service,  socialism  would  inevitably 
prove  a  serious  failure.  The  poor  organization  and  man- 
agement of  the  productive  forces  of  society  would  lead  to 
far  greater  waste  than  that  which  we  experience  at  the 
present  time.  It  is  much  to  be  feared  that  men  cannot 
be  socialized  to  that  extent  that  they  will  generally  ac- 
cept the  principle  of  equal  reward  for  their  services, 


236  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

even  could  it  be  shown-  that  it  were  desirable.  And  it 
is  impossible  to  show  this,  for  quite  the  contrary  is  true. 

It  is  urged  that  in  the  family  we  see  what  ethical  re- 
quirements are,  and  we  should  blame  a  father  who,  at  his 
table,  gave  the  best  food  to  the  strong,  and  inferior  food 
to  the  feeble,  clothed  the  most  capable  children  in  fine 
clothing,  and  allowed  those  who  were  so  unfortunate  as 
to  be  cripples  to  go  in  rags.  Such  discrimination  would 
shock  our  consciences.  The  children  of  the  family  may 
render  unequally  valuable  services,  but  that  cannot  jus- 
tify the  inequality  in  reward ;  yet  this  is  only  a  part  of 
the  problem  of  the  distribution  of  income.  When  it 
comes  to  the  question  of  the  use  of  material  resources  for 
the  development  of  faculties,  we  feel  that  the  father  is 
justified  in  spending  far  more  on  the  son  who  has  the 
larger  faculties  to  be  developed.  If  his  means  are  lim- 
ited, he  may  keep  the  feebler  son  at  home,  and  send  the 
other  son  away  to  an  academy,  college,  and  university, 
and  finally  to  travel  in  foreign  lands,  spending  ten  times 
as  much  upon  him  as  the  other.  This  is  ethically  justifi- 
able ;  but  on  the  other  hand,  we  admit  that  "the  son  who 
receives  this  far  larger  share  of  the  family  income  must 
see  to  it  that  he  uses  these  developed  faculties  for  the  in- 
terest of  the  weaker  brother  as  well  as  his  own.  Other- 
wise he  fails  in  meeting  the  requirements  of  ethics. 

Similarly,  it  is  quite  proper  that  various  members  of 
society  should  consume  large  quantities  of  economic 
goods,  even  when  others  lack  some  of  the  necessities  of 
life,  because  it  is  demanded  for  the  sake  of  the  higher 
interests  of  society.  But  those  who  have  been  favored 
must  remember  that  they  have  been  favored,  and  use  all 
their  faculties  and  resources  for  the  good  of  society  as 
a  whole.  Here  we  draw  a  line  between  that  consumption 


SOCIALISM  AS  A   SCHEME  OF  DISTRIBUTION.     237 

of  goods  which  ministers  to  development  in  any  form, 
and  that  consumption  which  serves  simply  to  gratify 
vanity,  or  which  merely  promotes  sensual  enjoyment. 
Luxury  stands  condemned. 

All  this  brings  us  to  the  observation  that  there  is  great 
danger  that,  under  socialism,  the  true  requirements  of 
those  engaged  in  the  higher  pursuits  would  be  under- 
estimated, and  that  the  importance  of  those  occupations 
which  contribute  most  to  the  advancement  of  civiliza- 
tion would  fail  to  secure  adequate  appreciation.  The 
extent  of  natural  inequalities,  and  the  differences  in  the 
requirements  of  men,  are  not  understood  by  the  masses 
of  mankind ;  and  it  is  extremely  difficult,  if  not  impossi- 
ble, to  make  them  understand  these  inequalities  and  dif- 
ferences. This  being  the  case,  we  have  every  reason  to 
apprehend  that,  under  socialism,  there  would  be  inade- 
quate provision  by  the  masses  for  those  who  carry  forward 
the  most  important  work ;  that  is  to  say,  those  whose  pro- 
ducts are  immaterial,  ministering  to  the  higher  parts  of 
our  nature.  If  this  is  so,  the  result  of  socialism  would  be 
a  non-progressive  society,  and  in  consequence  all  would 
finally  suffer,  because,  under  a  satisfactory  social  organ- 
ization, every  class  will  sooner  or  later  share,  to  a  cer- 
tain extent,  in  the  advantages  resulting  from  progress  in 
science,  art,  letters,  religion. 

Abundant  illustrations  of  this  danger  are  afforded  by 
existing  society.  It  is  generally  proposed,  in  fact  almost 
universally  proposed,  that  socialism  should  be  organized 
as  democracy ;  but  it  has  been  the  precise  weakness  of 
democracy,  that  it  has  failed  to  appreciate  the  best 
things,  and  has  been  unwilling  to  grant  public  money 
to  promote  undertakings  which  do  not  imply  material 
gain.  Democracy  has  been  inclined  to  raise  wages,  and 


238  SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

for  this  we  must  praise  it ;  but  it  has  also  been  inclined 
to  give  low  salaries,  and  for  this  we  must  condemn  it ; 
because  salaries,  as  distinguished  from  wages,  represent 
the  remuneration  for  talent  and  special  qualifications. 
Those  who  receive  the  salaries  are  engaged  in  occupations 
which  cannot  be  neglected,  if  civilization  is  to  continue  its 
progress.  We  have  already  cited  the  course  of  the  Lon- 
don County  Council  as  an  illustration  of  the  strength  of 
socialism,  but  it  illustrates  also  its  weakness.  Mr.  Fred- 
eric Harrison,  who  has  praised  this  council  highly,  is 
also  obliged  to  say,  "Unfortunately,  the  zeal  of  the 
majority  to  raise  the  wages  of  the  laborer  has  been  too 
often  accompanied  by  an  equal  zeal  to  reduce  the  sala- 
ries of  the  higher  professional  skill.  .  .  .  But  it  marks 
the  economic  zeal  of  a  new  public-spirited  body,  that  it 
listens  to  John  Burns  telling  it,  'that  the  man  does 
not  live  who  is  worth  a  salary  of  five  hundred  pounds 
a  year.' " 1 

Elsewhere  we  are  told  that  there  are  not  a  score  of 
men  in  the  service  of  the  English  municipalities  who  re- 
ceive salaries  of  a  thousand  pounds  a  year;  and  that 
those  representing  the  new  democracy  in  England  are 
insisting  that  two  hundred  and  fifty  pounds  a  year  shall 
be  the  maximum  salary  for  municipal  officials,  regardless 
of  their  qualifications  or  responsibilities.2  The  United 

1  A  prominent  member  of  the  Fabian  Society  sends  the  author  the 
following  comment  upon  the  above  passage:  "  May  I  say  that  your 
reference  to  the  London  County  Council  salaries  is  misleading.     It  is 
true  that  Burns  did  let  slip  in  the  heat  of  debate  the  unhappy  phrase 
you  quote.     But  his  action  has  been  much  more  sensible.     And  no 
one  would  gather  from  your  statement  that  the  London  County  Coun- 
cil pays  no  fewer  than  forty-seven  of  its  officials  over  £500  a  year, 
twenty  of  them  getting  £1,000  or  over— no  bad  sums  according  to  the 
English  scale." 

2  "  Labor  Politics  in  a  New  Place,"  by  Edward  Porritt  in  the 
North  American  Review,  March,  18!H. 


SOCIALISM  AS  A   SCHEME  OF  DISTRIBUTION.    239 

States  is  also,  in  its  entire  history,  proof  and  illustration 
of  this  tendency  in  democracy.  Our  various  American 
governments  have  always  paid  wages  which  have  given  an 
upward  tendency  to  the  labor  market,  —  wages,  in  fact, 
above  rather  than  below  those  paid  by  private  employers 
-under  similar  circumstances ;  but  our  governments,  na- 
tional, State,  and  municipal,  as  a  rule,  pursue  a  mean  and 
socially  unfortunate  policy  with  respect  to  salaries ;  so 
that  a  man  with  high  qualifications  rarely  has  an  oppor- 
tunity to  serve  his  country  in  public  office,  whether  elec- 
tive or  appointive,  without  making  a  sacrifice  so  great 
that  many,  who  would  otherwise  confer  benefit  upon  the 
community  in  public  office,  refuse  to  bear  the  burden. 

At  the  present  time  we  are  not  dependent  exclusively 
upon  what  the  democracy  will  do  for  us.  After  we  have 
secured  from  government  all  that  we  can  to  promote  art 
and  letters,  and  the  higher  interests  of  society  generally, 
we  can  appeal  to  those  who  in  private  industry  have  won 
large  resources  to  supply  the  deficiencies  in  the  public 
service.  Private  individuals  are  also  able  to  take  the 
initiative,  by  their  contributions,  to  educate  the  public  up 
to  a  point  where  they  will  do  more  than  they  are  now 
doing,  to  promote  the  best  interests  of  society.  A  con- 
crete instance  will  best  illustrate  the  point.  A  wealthy 
woman  in  Boston,  feeling  the  importance  of  sewing, 
cooking,  and  other  industrial  features  in  the  public 
school  system,  which  the'  educational  authorities  were 
unwilling  to  support,  defrayed  the  expenses  Cut  of  her 
own  pocket,  until  the  public  became  educated  up  to  an 
appreciation  of  the  new  features  in  the  public  schools, 
and  became  willing  to  support  them  by  taxation. 

Similarly,  a  State  university  is  not  now  dependent  ex- 
clusively upon  what  a  legislature  will  see  fit  to  appropriate 


240  SOCIALISM  AND   SOCIAL   REFOKM. 

for  it ;  but  it  can  appeal  to  private  individuals  to  supple- 
ment public  appropriations,  to  raise  salaries  if  they  are 
inadequate  for  the  best  work  on  the  part  of  the  profes- 
sors, to  provide  more  abundantly  books  and  apparatus, 
and  especially  to  endow  those  departments  the  impor- 
tance of  which  is  not  generally  sufficiently  appreciated. 

Classical  philology  might  be  cited  as  an  instance.  An 
American  legislature  rarely  appreciates  the  importance 
of  classical  studies;  but  a  right-minded  man  of  wealth, 
knowing  their  value,  might  give  them  a  firm  founda- 
tion in  a  State  university  by  adequate  endowment.  It 
would  seem,  then,  that  we  shall  achieve  better  results  if 
we  have  the  possibility  of  a  co-operation  of  individual 
effort  with  the  public  effort,  than  if  we  rely  exclusively 
upon  what  the  public,  as  such,  is  willing  to  do;  for  it 
must  be  borne  in  mind  that  socialism,  even  if  moderate 
and  conservative,  would  ultimately  reduce  incomes  to 
such  an  extent  that  no  one  person  could  do  very  much 
out  of  his  own  resources  to  carry  forward  the  work  of 
society. 

What  we  need  everywhere  in  modern  society,  and 
especially  in  the  United  States,  is  a  natural  aristocracy, 
by  which  we  mean  an  aristocracy  of  merit.  Provision 
may  conceivably  be  made  for  a  true  aristocracy  in  the 
structure  of  government  itself.  Such  is  to  some  extent 
the  case  in  countries  like  England  and  Germany,  al- 
though in  both  countries  the  so-called  aristocracy  is 
largely  based  upon  artificial  distinctions,  and  has  no  real 
foundations  in  superiority  of  talent  or  services.  Never- 
theless, we  do  find  that,  on  the  whole,  in  these  countries, 
and  especially  in  Germany,  those  who  have  control  of 
government  show  considerable  appreciation  of  the  higher 
goods  of  life.  They  know  the  value  of  art,  of  letters,  of 


SOCIALISM  AS  A    SCHEME   OF  DISTRIBUTION.    241 

the  highest  education,  and  are  well  aware  of  the  fact 
that  public  expenditure  for  the  encouragement  of  the 
higher  fruits  of  civilization  yields  large  return  to  the 
tax-payer.  The  public  authorities  of  Germany  know 
the  importance,  for  example,  of  investigation  in  universi- 
ties, and  understand  that  quality  in  work  means  more 
than  quantity.  They  know  also  how  essential  it  is  to 
work  of  the  best  sort,  that  professors  should  enjoy  free- 
dom in  instruction  and  research,  and  also  permanent 
positions  with  assured  income. 

This  merely  offers  one  illustration  of  many  which 
might  be  adduced.  Now,  the  point  which  we  must  bear 
in  mind  is  this :  If  the  structure  of  government  itself 
does  not  furnish  scope  for  a  true  aristocracy,  then  a 
place  outside  the  government  must  be  found  to  give  to 
true  aristocracy  opportunity  to  exercise  the  beneficent 
influence  which  belongs  to  it.  And  we  must  not  by  any 
means  underrate  that  cultivation  of  the  finer  forms  and 
graces  of  life  which  is  one  part  of  the  functions  of  a 
true  aristocracy.  We  must  only  insist  that  those  who 
have  great  social  opportunities  should  not  use  them 
selfishly,  but  generously  for  the  public  weal. 

A  wise  truth  for  the  guidance  of  society  was  offered 
by  Christ  in  these  words,  "  For  unto  whomsoever  much 
is  given,  of  him  much  will  be  required :  and  to  whom 
men  have  committed  much,  of  him  they  will  ask  the 
more." * 

All  this  is  naturally  opposed  to  a  false  and  most  per- 
nicious doctrine  of  equality.  A  full  recognition  of  the 
actual  and,  indeed,  marvellous  inequalities  among  men,  in 
their  natural  capacities  as  well  as  requirements,  must 
tend  to  mitigate  the  hardships  and  injustice  which  are 

i  St.  Luke  xii.  48. 


242          SOCIALISM  AND  SOCIAL  REFORM. 

apt  to  accompany  actual  inequalities.  If  all  men  claim 
that  they  are  naturally  equal,  then  the  logical  conclusion 
is  that  they  should  be  all  treated  equally.  But  as  a  well- 
known  jurist  has  said :  "  Nothing  can  be  more  unequal 
than  the  equal  treatment  of  unequals."  1  The  result  of 
a  failure  to  recognize  natural  inequalities  is  seen  in  those 
judicial  decisions  which  break  down  beneficent  labor 
legislation  on  the  ground  that  it  interferes  with  free  con- 
tract. It  is  assumed  that  the  feeble,  and  perhaps  half 
starved,  working  girl,  occupies  a  position  of  substantial 
equality  with  her  powerful  millionaire  employer,  and 
that  she  is  able  to  guard  her  own  interests  in  labor 
contracts. 

The  law  of  population  is  regarded  by  many  as  a  fatal 
objection  to  socialism.  It  is  generally  held  that  guaran- 
teed incomes,  and  assured  support  for  one's  family  as  well 
as  one's  self,  would  lead  to  an  excessive  growth  of  popu- 
lation from  which  all  would  suffer.  At  the  present  time, 
the  very  conditions  of  life  impose  restrictions  upon  the 
growth  of  population.  What,  under  socialism,  would 
take  the  place  of  these  conditions,  which  are  often  very 
hard?  Experience  shows  that  under  favorable  circum- 
stances population  is  capable  of  doubling  itself  at  least 
once  in  twenty-five  years ;  and  this  would  lead  to  an  over- 
population of  the  world  in  a  very  short  time,  and  in  a  few 
centuries  would  fill  the  world  with  so  many  people  that 
there  would  not  be  standing-room  for  any  more. 

It  is  easy  to  say  that  the  increase  of  population  brings 
new  hands  and  consequently  additional  productive  power, 

1  "Man  weiss  eben  heute,  dass  es  keine  grossere  Ungleichheit 
gibt,  als  das  Ungleiche  gleich  zubehandeln."  Prof.  Anton  Menger 
in  "  Das  biirgerliche  Recht  und  die  besitzlosen  Volksklassen,"  Archiv 
f  iir  soziale  Gesetzgebung  und  Statistik,  Bd.  II.  §  20. 


SOCIALISM  AS  A   SCHEME  OF  DISTRIBUTION.     243 

but  it  is  only  up  to  a  certain  point  that  additional  labor 
power  increases  production  proportionately. 

Much  may  be  said  about  this  principle  of  population, 
and  certain  contrary  tendencies,  which,  it  is  alleged,  make 
the  fear  of  over-population  groundless.  Certain  authors 
assert  that,  as  men  develop  intellectually,  the  rate  of 
population  tends  to  decrease.  Others  claim  that  it  is  the 
wretched  and  miserable  who  add  most  recklessly  to  the 
present  population,  and  that  material  prosperity,  in  itself, 
checks  the  growth  of  population.  Still  others  suggest 
artificial  remedies.  It  is  also  urged  that  public  opinion 
would  be  an  adequate  restraining  force.  It  must  be  said 
that  the  principle  of  population  has  not  yet  been  suffi- 
ciently discussed,  and  that  we  are  still  much  in  the  dark 
in  regard  to  the  possibilities  which  it  carries  with  it, 
under  this  or  that  social  system. 

Certainly  there  is  more  than  room  on  the  earth  for  all 
who  now  live  upon  it ;  and  were  society  well  organized, 
the  population  might  increase  rapidly  for  some  time 
without  disaster.  On  the  other  hand,  we  cannot,  in  our 
plans  of  social  reconstruction,  safely  neglect  the  dangers 
and  disadvantages  of  an  excessively  large  population.1 

1  Cf.  "  Die  Stellung  der  Sozialisten  zur  Malthns'schen  Bevolker- 
ungslehre,"  by  Heinrich  Soetbeer,  and  "The  Evolution  of  Sex,"  by 
Patrick  Geddes  and  J.  Arthur  Thomson,  chap.  xx. 


244  SOCIALISM  AND   SOCIAL  REFORM 


CHAPTER  VIII. 
OTHER   OBJECTIONS   TO   SOCIALISM 

WE  have  now  considered  the  most  serious  objections 
to  socialism ;  and  chief  among  these  are  the  tendencies 
to  revolutionary  dissatisfaction  which  it  would  be  likely 
to  carry  with  it ;  the  difficulties  in  the  way  of  the  organ- 
ization of  several  important  factors  of  production  under 
socialism,  notably  agriculture ;  difficulties  in  the  way  of 
determining  any  standard  of  distributive  justice  that 
would  be  generally  acceptable,  and  at  the  same  time 
would  enlist  the  whole-hearted  services  of  the  most 
gifted  and  talented  members  of  the  community ;  and 
finally,  the  danger  that  the  requirements  of  those  per- 
sons engaged  in  higher  pursuits  would  be  under-esti- 
mated, and  the  importance  of  those  occupations  which 
contribute  most  to  the  advancement  of  civilization  should 
fail  to  secure  adequate  appreciation.  These  we  should 
call  the  four  main  weaknesses  of  socialism.  If  socialism 
could  overcome  the  difficulties  which  have  already  been 
mentioned,  perhaps  a  multitude  of  others  could  also  be 
satisfactorily  surmounted.  Socialists  are  not,  we  must 
confess,  altogether  wrong  in  their  position  that  they 
cannot  be  expected  to  solve  in  advance  all  the  difficult 
problems  of  a  new  society,  and  that  it  will  be  time  to 
meet  difficulties  when  they  arise.  It  is  true  that  if  we 
are  persuaded  in  regard  to  the  main  features  of  social- 
ism, we  can  make  the  claim  that  we  can  only  be  required 
to  meet  the  problems  which  immediately  present  them- 


OTHER  OBJECTIONS  TO  SOCIALISM.          245 

selves,  and  can  adopt  as  a  watchword,  "  The  next 
thing!"  We  cannot,  however,  call  ourselves  socialists, 
and  take  measures  to  bring  about  socialism,  unless  we 
have  reached  conviction  in  regard  to  the  desirability  of 
socialism  in  its  essential  features  and  the  possibility  of 
overcoming  the  chief  and  fundamental  difficulties  which 
stand  in  the  way  of  this  new  contemplated  social  order. 

Attention,  however,  will  be  briefly  called  to  a  few 
other  difficulties  and  objections  of  importance.  One  is 
the  maintenance  of  an  equilibrium  between  supply  and 
demand.  Quite  generally  socialists  have  held  to  the  doc- 
trine that  value  depends  upon  labor,  and  is  measured  by 
what  is  called  "socially  necessary  labor-time."  This 
means  that  the  value  of  an  article  depends  upon  the 
time  which  it  requires  the  average  workman,  using  mod- 
ern machinery  and  industrial  methods,  to  produce  it. 
What  is  the  value  of  a  yard  of  woollen  cloth  ?  We 
ascertain  the  number  of  yards,  which,  say,  ten  thousand 
men  can  produce,  working  with  due  diligence,  and  using 
the  best  appliances  and  methods.  If  we  divide  this  num- 
ber of  yards  by  ten  thousand,  we  shall  find  the  share  of 
the  product  which  must  be  credited  to  each  man.  The 
value  of  these  yards  will  be  "  one  day  " ;  for  that  is  the 
socially  necessary  time  required  for  their  production. 
This  does  not  hold  as  a  law  of  value  at  the  present  time, 
for  it  fails  to  take  account  of  monopolistic  elements 
found  everywhere  in  production;  and  it  could  not  hold 
under  socialism,  for  it  would  not  maintain  an  equilib- 
rium between  supply  and  demand.  The  reasons  why 
such  a  law  of  value  would  not  be  practicable  under  so- 
cialism, any  more  than  at  present,  are  numerous,  and 
only  one  or  two  can  be  mentioned.  The  articles  for  con- 
sumption find  their  value  in  desire,  and,  we  may  say,  to 


246  SOCIALISM  AND   SOCIAL   REFORM. 

speak  more  accurately,  unsatisfied  desire.1  We  desire 
the  satisfaction  of  some  want  as  yet  unsatisfied,  and  the 
intensity  of  the  desire  determines  what  we  will  give  for 
the  article  which  is  able  to  satisfy  the  want.  Now, 
the  strength  of  the  desire  cannot  be  entirely  dependent 
upon  socially  necessary  labor-time.  We  may  take  two 
kinds  of  wine :  both  have  required  the  same  quantity  of 
labor  for  their  production ;  but  one  has  grown  on  a  rare 
and  unusual  site,  and  the  other  one  on  a  good  average 
piece  of  land  for  the  production  of  wine  grapes.  The 
bottle  of  the  one  has  a  value,  we  will  say,  of  five  dollars, 
and  the  other  of  one  dollar.  These  differences  in  value 
cannot  be  explained  by  private  property  in  land,  but  are 
due  to  the  natural  limitation  of  land  of  the  best  kind  for 
the  production  of  wine.  Should  socialists  in  the  social- 
istic state  fix  the  same  price  upon  one  which  they  did 
upon  the  other,  the  supply  of  the  first  kind  would  be  im- 
mediately exhausted  by  a  general  scramble  for  it,  while 
the  second  kind  would  be  neglected  until  the  first  had 
been  exhausted.  Probably  many  of  those  receiving  the 
better  kind  would  offer  it  for  sale  at  a  higher  valuation, 
and  thus  receive  that  unearned  increment  which  now 
goes  to  the  land-owner.  On  account  of  varieties  in  soil, 
other  agricultural  products  serve  equally  as  illustration. 
The  same  would  hold  true  with  mineral  products.  Other 
reasons  why  a  stable  equilibrium  between  demand  and 
supply  could  not  be  secured  under  the  operation  of 
the  law  of  value,  determined  by  a  socially  necessary 
labor-time,  is  the  capricious  and  uncertain  nature  of 
human  wants.  It  can  never  be  possible  to  anticipate 
these  with  perfect  accuracy.  If  values  depended  simply 
upon  labor-time,  we  should  have  frequently  redundant 
1  Of.  Ely's  "  Outlines  of  Economics,"  Part  II.,  chap.  i. 


OTHER    OBJECTIONS   TO   SOCIALISM.  247 

supplies  of  articles  of  some  kinds,  of  which  it  would  per- 
haps be  impossible  ever  to  dispose,  and  frequent  deficien- 
cies of  other  kinds.  It  would  be  necessary  for  socialists 
to  regulate  value  more  in  accordance  with  the  laws  which 
actually  obtain  in  society,  raising  and  lowering  price  in 
such  manner  as  to  keep  an  equilibrium  between  supply 
and  demand.  This  would  be  likely  to  result  in  a  surplus 
labove  costs  of  production,  corresponding  in  some  degree 
to  present  unearned  income.  This  does  not  suggest  an 
insuperable  obstacle  if  socialism  is  otherwise  practicable, 
because  this  surplus  could  be  used  for  public  purposes. 
It  does,  however,  overthrow  a  great  deal  of  current  so- 
cialism, even  if  it  does  not  attack  the  essence  of  socialism. 

Ordinarily,  there  goes  with  the  doctrine  of  value  just 
described,  the  proposal  to  abolish  money  and  substitute 
therefor  labor  checks,  certifying  the  amount  of  labor 
time.  What  has  been  said  seems  to  show  that  this  sub- 
stitute for  money  would  scarcely  be  practicable,  and  it 
raises  the  question  what  could  take  the  place  of  money  ? 
The  most  natural  and  easiest  method  would,  perhaps,  be 
to  continue  our  present  monetary  system,  and  simply 
attempt  to  improve  it.  The  abolition  of  money  is  no 
accessary  part  of  a  conservative  socialism,  and  the  de- 
mand for  this  abolition  may  have  arisen  from  a  fanatical 
desire  for  equality.  Of  course  money  would  make  possi- 
ble certain  inequalities  in  wealth  ;  but  with  the  great  in- 
struments of  production  socially  owned  and  operated, 
these  would  be  sufficiently  limited  to  satisfy  conserva- 
tively inclined  socialists  • 

Another  difficulty  under  socialism  would  be  the  distri- 
bution of  labor  forces  in  such  manner  that  production 
might  be  developed  in  harmonious  proportions.  How 
shall  the  men  and  women  of  society  be  allotted  to 


248  SOCIALISM  AND   SOCIAL  REFORM. 

their  several  spheres  ?  The  difficulty  is  immense.  Mr. 
Bellamy  has  proposed  to  equalize  various  occupations 
in  attractiveness,  hoping,  thereby,  that  naturally  and 
spontaneously  each  one  would  find  his  proper  place  in 
industrial  society.  If  a  certain  pursuit  is  especially  disa- 
greeable, and  the  number  offering  themselves  for  the  pur- 
suit is  insufficient,  he  holds  that  the  length  of  the  labor 
day  should  be  shortened,  and  thus  the  pursuit  be  ren- 
dered more  attractive.  Should,  however,  the  number  of- 
fering  themselves  for  any  one  occupation  be  larger  than 
required  to  satisfy  the  demand  for  the  services  or  com- 
modities produced  by  those  engaged  in  that  occupation, 
he  holds  that  the  working  day  should  be  lengthened,  and 
thus  the  occupation  rendered  less  attractive.  When  we 
contemplate  the  various  occupations  which  are  necessary, 
it  would  hardly  seem  that  equality  could  in  this  manner 
be  secured.  Could  we  thus  equalize  the  supply  with 
demand  in  the  learned  professions  ?  What  extension 
of  the  work  of  university  professors  would  bring  down 
the  supply  to  such  an  extent  that  it  would  equalize  the 
demand  for  professorships  ?  How  could  the  supply  of 
the  highest  positions  in  the  socialistic  state  be  equalized 
with  demand,  by  changing  the  length  of  the  working 
day  ?  To  ask  the  question  is  to  answer  it.  Many  occu- 
pations now  require,  and  should  under  any  system  re- 
quire, if  they  are  to  be  carried  on  satisfactorily,  the 
full  strength  and  time  of  those  who  are  engaged  in  them. 
Moreover,  the  interests  of  society  demand  that  there 
should  not  be  a  free  selection"  of  occupations,  so  far  as 
the  most  influential  and  desirable  positions  are  con- 
cerned, but  those  should  have  these  positions  who  are 
best  fitted  to  fill  them.  It  would  seem  that  it  would  be 
necessary  to  proceed  more  in  accordance  with  the  prin- 


OTHER    OBJECTIONS    TO   SOCIALISM.  249 

ciples  which  now  govern  selection  of  public  servants, 
where  the  civil  service  has  attained  a  condition  of  excel- 
lence ;  and  this  means  inequalities  in  reward  and  selection 
of  men,  on  the  basis  of  natural  talents  and  acquisitions. 
It  would  require  a  certain  amount  of  compulsion  of  an 
economic  nature,  but  very  likely  a  less  degree  than  that 
which  exists  in  the  economic  world  at  present.  Look 
at  it  as  we  will,  we  encounter  difficulties. 

Finally,  we  may  call  attention  to  certain  objections 
which  do  not  apply  to  socialism  in  itself,  but  which 
do  apply  to  the  ordinary  socialistic  mode  of  agitation. 
While  socialistic  agitation  has  had  a  beneficent  influence 
in  drawing  the  wage-earning  classes  together,  and  creat- 
ing among  them  a  feeling  of  fraternal  solidarity,  it  has, 
on  the  other  hand,  tended  to  separate  them  from  other 
classes  in  society,  depriving  them  of  the  help  which  they 
could  derive  from  these  other  classes,  and  giving  them 
an  unwarranted  confidence  in  their  capacity  for  political 
and  industrial  leadership.  This  has  been  the  inevitable 
outcome  of  the  Marxist  socialism,  which  treats  socialism 
as  a  class  problem,  telling  the  workers  that  their  emanci- 
pation must  come  entirely  from  their  own  efforts,  and 
employing  the  war-cry,  "  Workmen  of  all  countries, 
unite!"  Socialism  will  become  stronger  when  it  loses 
its  class  character  and  looks  for  leadership  to  men  of 
superior  intelligence  and  wide  experience. 


APPENDIX. 


APPENDIX. 

SUGGESTIONS    FOK    SOCIAL    REFORM. 

WE  have  now  examined  briefly  the  nature  of  socialism 
and  have  discussed  its  strong  features  as  well  as  its 
weaknesses.  It  remains  to  answer  the  question,  What 
suggestions  for  social  reform  may  we  gather  from  our 
investigation  of  the  claims  of  socialism  ?  It  would  be 
strange  indeed  if  a  social  system  which  has  so  large  and 
enthusiastic  a  body  of  believers,  many  of  them  men  of 
character  and  capacity,  did  not  have  in  it  important  ele- 
ments of  truth.  The  men  who  have  given  their  adhesion 
to  socialism  cannot  be  altogether  mistaken ;  for  we  must 
bear  in  mind  that  socialism  is  no  temporary  delusion 
which  has  carried  even  wise  men  off.  their  feet  for  a 
moment,  but  that  it  is  a  system  of  social  thought  which 
has  increased  in  strength  during  the  past  generation,  and 
that  continued  criticisms  of  the  keenest  minds  have  not 
been  able  to  prevent  it  from  gaining  increasing  hold 
upon  the  masses.  We  have  observed,  however,  that 
socialism  has  been  relatively  weak  where  its  claims  have 
been  examined  calmly  and  impartially,  and  especially 
where  a  readiness  has  been  manifested  to  receive  all  the 
elements  of  truth  which  it  contains. 

Socialism,  it  is  now  generally  admitted  by  impartial 
students,  has  shown  the  existence  of  serious  evils.  Re- 
cently, indeed,  we  have  been  told  by  Professor  Small,  of 
the  University  of  Chicago,  that  socialism  is  substantially 
correct  in  its  critique.  Even  if  we  do  not  go  so  far  as 


254  SOCIALISM    AND    SOCIAL    REFORM. 

this,  we  must  in  our  efforts  for  social  reform  take  into 
account  the  criticisms  of  present  industrial  society  which 
socialism  has  presented  so  forcibly.  But  there  is  one 
important  thought  which  occurs  in  this  connection. 
Socialism  as  presented  by  Marx  and  Engels  gives  us  an 
evolutionary  theory  of  society  which  shows  us  the  growth 
of  evils  which  it  is  claimed  will  at  last  become  intolerable 
and  will  lead  to  the  destruction  of  our  present  industrial 
order.  This  evolutionary  theory  of  society,  however, 
assumes  a  relatively  passive  attitude  of  men  in  the  face 
of  industrial  evils.  Marx  and  Engels  showed  fifty  years 
ago  what  would  be  the  outcome  of  social  evolution  in 
England,  provided  men  followed  a  passive  policy,  letting 
things  take  their  own  course.  Engels  in  particular  pre- 
dicted a  development  of  industrial  society  in  England, 
things  going  from  bad  to  worse,  which  has  not  been  sub- 
stantiated by  subsequent  experience.  The  reason  was 
that  the  best  minds  and  hearts  of  England  were  not 
content  to  let  things  take  their  own  course.  On  the  con- 
trary, they  set  about  to  effect  an  improvement  of  indus- 
trial and  social  conditions,  and  the  result  has  been  won- 
derful progress  along  every  line.  Crime  has  diminished, 
pauperism  has  decreased,  the  housing  of  the  poorer 
classes  has  been  improved,  educational  opportunities 
have  had  an  astounding  growth  and  have  been  brought 
within  reach  of  the  entire  English  population,  laws  have 
been  passed  affording  protection  to  labor  against  many 
abuses,  the  laws  repressing  and  restraining  combinations 
of  working  men  have  been  almost  altogether  removed, 
increased  wages  have  afforded  greater  comforts  to  the 
masses,  and  some  little  progress  at  least  has  been  made 
in  the  solution  of  the  monopoly  problem,  while  taxation 
has  been  marvellously  changed  and  that  in  the  direction 


SUGGESTIONS    FOR    SOCIAL    REFORM.        255 

of  equality  and  justice.  Much  remains  to  be  accom- 
plished, and  when  we  think  of  what  remains  we  may 
feel  that  only  a  beginning  has  been  made ;  but  this 
beginning,  certainly  a  large  beginning,  affords  valuable 
suggestions  for  social  reform.  The  conclusion,  from  the 
experience  not  only  of  England,  but  other  countries  also, 
seems  to  be  this  :  If  we  allow  things  to  take  their  own 
course,  if  we  remain  passive  in  the  presence  of  the  evils 
which  socialism  has  so  amply  demonstrated  and  vividly 
depicted,  the  result  may  well  be  that  outcome  which  the 
evolutionary  socialism  of  Marx  has  pointed  out.  But 
there  is  no  reason  why  we  should  remain  passive  in  the 
presence  of  evils.  On  the  contrary,  there  is  every  reason 
why  we  should  vigorously  attack  existing  evils,  and  do 
so  with  the  hope  that  they  can  be  abated  and  improve- 
ments in  social  conditions  can  be  effected. 

It  is  not  alone  with  respect  to  its  criticism  of  our 
present  industrial  order  that  we  must  take  socialism  as  a 
starting  point  in  our  constructive  efforts  for  social  ameli- 
oration. High  ideals  for  the  masses  have  been  estab- 
lished by  socialism,  and  that  once  for  all.  We  must  en- 
deavor, if  our  efforts  are  to  be  permanently  successful,  to 
realize  high  ideals  for  our  social  order,  and  accept  no 
limits  to  improvement  except  those  imposed  by  the  con- 
ditions of  our  social  coexistence. 

Another  valuable  suggestion  offered  by  socialism  is 
the  superiority  of  prevention  to  cure.  An  older  ideal  is 
brought  before  us  by  the  benevolent  man  in  novels  written 
fifty  years  ago.  Eugene  Sue's  "  Mysteries  of  Paris  "  af- 
fords an  illustration.  The  hero  relieves  distress  which 
falls  under  his  observation,  and  while  the  book  is  full  of 
generous  sentiment,  no  higher  ideal  seems  to  be  clearly 
presented  by  it  than  that  of  abounding  charity.  Social- 


256  SOCIALISM   AND    SOCIAL    REFORM. 

ism  has  made  it  quite  plain  that  the  great  problem  is  to 
prevent  distress,  and  the  experience  of  the  past  fifty 
years  has  shown  that  while  we  can  never  reach  our  ideal 
in  this  direction  we  can  make  large  and  continuous  prog- 
ress. It  is  doubtless  as  a  result  in  part  of  socialistic 
criticism  that  we  are  less  inclined  than  formerly  to  boast 
of  large  sums  given  in  alms,  or  of  the  provision  made  for 
the  relief  of  distress.  We  are  now  more  inclined  to  in- 
quire whether  or  not  this  need  for  alms  and  asylums 
could  not  have  been  in  large  measure  obviated.  We 
admit  that  it  is  all  very  well  to  furnish  wooden  limbs  to 
those  who  have  lost  their  arms  and  legs  in  the  railway 
service,  but  we  think  it  is  far  better  to  enforce  upon  rail- 
ways those  well-known  measures  which  will  prevent 
accidents  to  railway  employees. 

If  space  permitted  it  would  be  desirable  to  take  up  the 
suggestions  for  social  reform  which  we  may  derive  from 
socialism,  and  apply  these  suggestions  separately  to  pro- 
duction, to  distribution,  and  to  consumption.  As  it  is, 
however,  we  can  throw  out  only  a  thought  concerning 
each  one  of  these  departments  of  our  economic  life. 

As  far  as  production  is  concerned  we  may  say  that 
socialism  suggests  that  the  wastes  of  the  competitive  order 
may  be  greatly  diminished  ;  also  that  the  productive  re. 
sources  of  society  may  be  more  largely  utilized  than  at 
present. 

Perhaps  the  most  all-embracing  ideal  of  socialism,  as 
far  as  distribution  of  wealth  is  concerned,  is  expressed  in 
the  formula  of  Louis  Blanc  :  ''From  each  one  according 
to  his  faculties ;  to  each  one  according  to  his  needs."  ! 
It  has  never  been  shown  how  this  ideal  could  be  fully 
realized,  and  it  seems  that  under  socialism  it  would  be 

1  Cf .  Ely's  "French  and  German  Socialism,"  pages  121-122. 


SUGGESTIONS    FOR    SOCIAL    REFORM.        257 

especially  difficult  to  realize  it.  We  have  pointed  out 
difficulties  along  this  line  in  our  examination  of  the 
weaknesses  of  socialism.  We  may,  however,  keep  it  be- 
fore us  even  while  we  adhere  to  our  present  social  order, 
and  we  may  seek  to  press  forward  continuously  in  the 
direction  of  this  ideal.  When  we  say  this  we  are  giving 
voice  to  no  Utopian  aspirations,  but  are  simply  describ- 
ing the  general  trend  of  many  movements  now  actually 
in  progress.  What  else  than  this  do  the  educational 
movements  of  our  day  signify  ?  When  we  consider  all 
these  multiplied  educational  facilities  for  the  develop- 
ment of  body,  mind,  and  spirit,  do  we  not  find  that  they 
are  operating  to  put  each  one  in  that  place  in  society  in 
which  he  may  serve  society  in  accordance  with  his 
capacities  ?  Far  enough  away  are  we  from  fully  reach- 
ing this  ideal ;  but  if  we  take  the  view  that  all  progress 
must  be  a  gradual  growth,  we  may  feel  encouraged  to 
press  forward  along  the  best  existing  lines.  And  when 
we  take  into  account  what  public  libraries,  public  galler- 
ies and  museums,  public  places  for  recreation  are  doing, 
we  must  acknowledge  that  some  things  are  furnished  to 
us  in  accordance  with  our  needs.  When  to  all  these 
considerations  we  add  the  influence  of  the  tendencies 
revealed  by  taxation,  especially  of  bequests  and  inheri- 
tances, we  shall  acknowledge  that  along  other  lines  we 
are  making  progress  in  the  direction  of  equality  of  oppor- 
tunities ;  and  equality  of  opportunities  in  turn  operates 
to  assign  to  members  of  the  community  work  according 
to  their  capacities,  and  to  grant  them  a  reward  in  ac- 
cordance with  their  needs. 

The  monopoly  problem  has  to  be  considered  in  this 
connection  as  well  as  in  connection  with  the  problem  of 
production.  As  far  as  private  monopoly  exists  it  stands 


258  SOCIALISM    AND    SOCIAL    REFORM. 

in  the  way  of  our  ideal,  and  as  far  as  we  make  progress 
in  the  solution  of  the  monopoly  problem  we  are  approach- 
ing our  ideal. 

Socialism  also  has  suggestions  with  respect  to  con- 
sumption. We  can  take  the  best  that  socialism  has  to 
offer  and  endeavor  to  incorporate  that  into  the  present 
social  order.  The  ideal  of  consumption  is  simplicity 
and  private  frugality,  consumption  which  ministers  to 
the  higher  rather  than  the  lower  needs,  generous  expen- 
diture for  those  things  which  we  enjoy  in  common,  and 
for  dignity  and  beauty  in  public  life.  The  magnificent 
Congressional  Library  building  in  Washington,  which 
belongs  to  the  entire  nation,  is  an  illustration  of  wise 
consumption. 

Socialism  is  essentially  a  theory  of  monopoly,  and  it 
is  especially  fruitful  in  suggestions  for  those  undertak- 
ings which  are  monopolies.  In  fact,  we  may  say  that  in 
the  main  socialism  is  sound  for  monopolistic  undertak- 
ings. The  suggestion,  then,  which  socialism  offers  as  far 
as  monopoly  is  concerned  is  to  examine  the  field  of 
monopoly  and  to  separate  it  out  from  the  field  of  com- 
petitive industries.  The  best  tendencies  of  thought  at 
the  present  day  seem  to  favor  the  view  that  there  is  a 
field  of  industry  in  which  competition  is  ruled  out  and 
in  which  attempts  to  introduce  competition  work  only 
disaster,  whereas  there  is  a  field  in  which  the  competi- 
tive order  produces  the  best  results.  It  must  not  be 
understood  that  the  socialistic  method,  or  perhaps  rather 
the  method  which  socialism  suggests  with  respect  to  the 
management  of  monopolies,  will  prove  to  be  free  from 
evils  and  difficulties.  It  is  simply  stated  that  the  diffi- 
culties will  be  less  under  collective  ownership  and  man- 
agement than  under  private  ownership  and  management. 


SUGGESTIONS    FOR    SOCIAL    REFORM.        259 

Private  ownership  and  management  are  appropriate  for 
the  competitive  field,  but  evils  will  still  remain  after  we 
have  done  our  best  to  reduce  them  to  the  lowest  terms. 
The  claim  is  that  the  difficulties  and  evils  of  private 
industry  in  the  competitive  sphere  will  be  far  less  than 
would  be  the  evils  attendant  upon  collective  ownership 
and  management  of  industry  in  this  sphere. 

What,  then,  is  the  field  of  monopoly,  and  what  is  the 
field  of  private  industry  ?  The  author  presents  here- 
with a  new  classification  of  monopoly  which  will  prove 
suggestive  in  this  connection,  although  it  is  necessary 
to  refer  the  reader  to  other  works  for  a  fuller  discus- 
sion of  his  views  on  this  subject,  inasmuch  as  it  is 
quite  impossible,  in  the  page  or  two  at  his  disposal,  to 
offer  proofs  of  the  position  assumed  in  the  discussion  of 
monopoly. ' 

Monopolies  are : 

A.  Social  (or  Artificial). 

B.  Natural. 

The  Social  Monopolies  may  be  subdivided  thus : 
I.     General  Welfare  Monopolies  : 

1.  Patents. 

2.  Copyrights. 

3.  Public  Consumption  Monopolies. 

4.  Trade-marks. 

5.  Fiscal  Monopolies. 

1  A  further  discussion  will  be  found  in  Ely's  "  Outlines  of 
Economics"  (College  edition)  :  in  "•  Socialism  and  Social  Reform," 
identical  with  the  present  work,  except  that  this  part  on  "  Social 
Reform "  is  there  further  elaborated ;  and  in  the  author's  articles 
in  the  magazine  "  Progress  "  of  Chicago,  November  and  Decem- 
ber, 1898. 


260  SOCIALISM    AND    SOCIAL    REFORM. 

II.     Special  Privilege  Monopolies  : 

1.  Government  (or  Public)  Favoritism. 

2.  Private  Favoritism. 

Natural  Monopolies  are  : 

1.  Those  arising  from  limited  supply  of  raw  mate- 
rial. 

2.  Those  arising  from  properties  inherent   in  the 
business. 

Patents  and  copyrights  are  temporarily  monopolies 
conferred  upon  private  individuals  as  a  reward  for  ser- 
vices, and  it  is  held  that  in  these  cases  the  advantages 
outweigh  the  disadvantages.  All  that  is  desired,  as  far 
as  they  are  concerned,  is  to  develop  the  laws  regulating 
these  monopolies  in  such  a  way  as  to  protect  adequately 
both  private  and  public  rights.  Public  consumption 
monopolies  refer  to  such  monopolies  as  the  monopoly  in 
alcoholic  liquors  established  in  Switzerland  and  the  mo- 
nopoly in  the  retail  trade  in  intoxicating  beverages  estab- 
lished in  South  Carolina.  These  are,  as  their  term 
implies,  designed  to  promote  wholesale  consumption  or 
to  limit  deleterious  consumption.  Trade-marks  are  of 
minor  significance.  Fiscal  monopolies  are  public  mo- 
nopolies established  in  the  interest  of  the  treasury.  The 
governmental  monopoly  of  the  tobacco  business  in  France 
affords  an  illustration.  It  is  simply  one  method  of  rais- 
ing public  revenue,  and  need  not  detain  us.  The  special 
privilege  monopolies  are  abuses.  If  at  any  time  a  mo- 
nopoly is  established  through  governmental  policy,  for 
example,  by  a  bad  sort  of  protective  tariff,  the  remedy 
suggests  itself.  Private  favoritism  is  a  more  prolific 
cause  of  monopoly  at  the  present  time.  Monopolies 
founded  upon  and  developed  by  special  railway  rates  or 


SUGGESTIONS    FOR    SOCIAL    REFORM.        261 

special  favors  of  any  sort  from  railways  afford  an  illus- 
tration. 

The  natural  monopolies  are  those  with  which  we  are 
especially  concerned  at  the  present  time,  and  here  the 
general  rule  is  public  ownership  and  management.  We 
have  reference  to  railways,  telegraphs  and  telephones, 
and  municipal  monopolies  such  as  street  cars,  water- 
works, and  lighting  works. 

The  governmental  unit  appropriate  for  ownership  and 
management  must  vary  in  accordance  with  the  nature  of 
the  monopoly.  In  the  case  of  railways  it  would  natu- 
rally be  the  nation;  in  the  case  of  lighting  works  the 
city.  In  the  case  of  some  enterprises  the  appropriate 
unit  for  operation  and  management  is  the  commonwealth 
standing  between  the  nation  and  the  city. 

It  must  be  distinctly  understood  that  the  present 
chapter  simply  gives  a  sketch  in  rough  outlines,  and  that 
all  the  qualifications  which  suggest  themselves  and 
which  would  be  necessary  to  fill  in  the  sketch  have  to 
be  omitted  on  account  of  lack  of  space.  When  this  is 
well  understood  it  is  believed  that  there  need  be  no 
opportunity  for  serious  misapprehension.  With  this 
understanding,  certain  advantages  anticipated  from  the 
socialization  of  monopoly  will  be  mentioned. 

It  is  anticipated  that  the  socialization  of  monopoly 
would  avoid  the  most  serious  wastes  which  at  the  pres- 
ent time  are  found  in  our  industrial  order ;  that  it  would 
lead  to  better  utilization  of  productive  forces,  and  many 
irregularities  in  our  economic  life  could  thereby  be 
avoided  ;  that  a  better  distribution  of  wealth  would  nat- 
urally result  therefrom,  and  that  monopolies  due  to  the 
favoritism  of  gigantic  private  undertakings  could  be 
obviated.  It  is  held,  furthermore,  that  all  naturally  pri- 


262  SOCIALISM    AND    SOCIAL    REFORM. 

vate  businesses  could  be  better  developed  under  social 
control  of  monopolistic  forces.  In  this  way  it  is  main- 
tained that  the  class  of  farmers,  upon  which  our  social 
order  so  largely  rests,  could  be  benefited.  The  interests 
of  freedom,  it  is  maintained,  would  be  promoted  by 
socialization  of  monopoly,  inasmuch  as  the  most  serious 
menace  to  freedom  at  the  present  time  conies  from  pri- 
vate monopoly  which  invades  even  our  churches  and 
institutions  of  learning.  Furthermore,  it  is  claimed  that 
socialization  of  monopoly  would  tend  to  piirification  of 
politics,  inasmuch  as  political  corruption  is  so  largely 
traceable  in  one  way  and  another  to  private  monopoly. 

We  have  left  as  appropriate  fields  for  private  business, 
agriculture,  manufacture,  and  commerce.  Here  the  prob- 
lem is  to  raise  the  level  upon  which  these  businesses  are 
and  may  be  conducted.  The  level  of  a  private  business 
is  raised  when  injurious  practices  are  prohibited  for  all 
alike  engaged  in  it.  As  long  as  one  manufacturer  em- 
ploys child  labor  others  may  feel  obliged  to  do  so  to 
hold  their  own  in  competition.  If  all  alike  are  forbidden 
to  employ  child  labor  they  may  compete  as  heretofore. 
This  general  principle  applies  to  all  the  laws  for  the 
protection  of  the  wage-earning  community,  especially 
children,  young  persons,  and  women.  It  is  in  this  spirit 
that  such  evils  as  the  sweat-shop  should  be  attacked. 
Here  again  we  are  giving  voice  to  no  Utopian  aspirations, 
but  are  simply  indicating  the  lines  of  most  hopeful 
movements  both  in  our  own  and  in  other  countries. 

To  inaugurate  and  carry  out  social  and  economic  re- 
form various  political  reforms  have  been  proposed.  Of 
these  the  most  promising  are  proportional  representation 
and  the  initiative  and  referendum,  together  with  that  im- 
provement in  administrative  methods  suggested  by  civil 


SUGGESTIONS    FOR    SOCIAL    REFORM.        263 

service  reform.1  Each  one  of  these  reforms  has  its  ap- 
propriate sphere,  and  each  one  has  its  able  advocates. 

The  contrast  between  the  program  of  social  reform 
given  in  the  present  work  and  that  offered  by  the  advo- 
cates of  panaceas  is  most  marked.  The  reformer,  who 
has  his  one  remedy  for  all  social  evils,  will  have  little 
patience  with  what  he  will  regard  as  patchwork.  He 
wishes  us  to  go  to  the  root  of  things  and  to  reshape 
entirely  some  one  great  institution,  claiming  that  then 
everything  in  the  social  world  will  be  all  that  could  be 
desired.  At  the  same  time  the  advocate  of  a  single 
reform,  whether  this  be  "  free  trade  "  or  "single  tax  "  or 
"land  nationalization,"  has  a  position  of  vantage.  He 
elaborates  his  reform  in  all  its  details,  and  concentrates 
attention  upon  that.  Attention  is  divided,  in  the  pro- 
gram of  social  reform  presented  in  this  work,  among  a 
multiplicity  of  reforms  ;  and  this  may  at  first  be  thought 
a  weakness,  but  careful  reflection  will  show  that  it 
corresponds  to  the  complexity  of  modern  civilization. 

Reforms  must  come  from  many  different  sources,  and 
of  thousands  of  agencies  of  genuine  reform  and  progress 
not  one  can  be  spared.  No  one  person  will  be  in  a  posi- 
tion to  take  up  all  of  the  reforms  which  have  been  ad- 
vocated and  push  them  vigorously.  One  line  of  reform 
will  interest  one  class  of  persons,  and  another  line 
another  class,  and  thus,  working  together  more  or  less 
consciously,  the  progress  of  society  will  be  secured. 
What  has  been  advocated  is  an  ideal,  and  not  some- 
thing which  can  be  speedily  attained.  Possibly  this  out- 
line of  reform  contains  in  itself  a  strong  argument 

1  On  proportional  representation  and  especially  Professor  Com- 
mons's work,  published  in  Crowell's  Library  of  Economics  and 
Politics. 


264  SOCIALISM   AND    SOCIAL    REFORM. 

against  socialism,  although  not  intended  to  do  so.  It 
shows,  indeed,  how  long  is  the  way  we  must  travel 
before  we  can  accomplish  those  desirable  changes  within 
the  framework  of  existing  society  which  even  now 
suggest  themselves. 

One  line  of  thought  which  has  run  through  the  entire 
treatment  of  practicable  social  reform  is  social  solidarity. 
Men's  interests  are  inextricably  intertwined,  and  we  shall 
never  become  truly  prosperous  so  long  as  there  is  any 
class  of  the  population  materially  and  morally  wretched. 
As  a  social  body  we  can  no  more  be  in  a  sound  condition 
while  we  have  a  submerged  tenth,  than  a  man  can  be 
whose  arms  or  legs  are  suffering  with  a  foul  and  corrupt- 
ing disease.  Whether  we  will  or  not  we  must,  in  a  man- 
ner, rejoice  together  and  suffer  together.  The  sooner  the 
idea  of  social  solidarity,  which  is  not  only  a  doctrine 
but  a  real  fact,  is  recognized  in  all  its  ramifications,  the 
better  it  will  be  for  us. 


114710 


University  of  California  Library 
Los  Angeles 

This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


Phone 
3107* 


1  2  2005 


DC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 


A     000  704  221     1 


Un 


